Skip to main content

tv   CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin  CNN  February 14, 2019 12:00pm-1:00pm PST

12:00 pm
shutdown. republicans don't want to be caught in the same position this time. that's why a number of republican senators are saying very clearly, they want to hear exactly if the president will support it. i actually caught up with ron johnson, who's a wisconsin republican senator. i said, are you going to support this deal? he said, waiting to see what the president is thinking doesn't make much sense to support something he's going to veto. and even john thune, the number two republican in the senate, just told reporters, they're waiting to see what the president will do, because they're not willing to cross the president on this issue. democrats will say, put something on the floor, get a veto-proof majority if necessary, but a lot of republicans don't want to go there. they want the president to get behind this, which is why we're in a bit of holding pattern and the president again causing major anxiety on capitol hill, on the eve of this shutdown deadline by tomorrow night, ana? >> manu raju on capitol hill for us, with the play by play. and dana bash is here with me, she's cnn's chief political correspondent.
12:01 pm
dana, why wouldn't these republicans vote for the bill and call his bluff? or at least put it on him to shut the government down? >> exactly. this is, which comes first, the chicken or the egg? so is it going to be incumbent on these senators and members of the house, but less so in the house, because it's run by the democrats, and they're going to almost certainly put it on the floor. the senate, it's different. it's run by the republicans. and they have just as manu laid out, they have experience now with passing something that they thought the president was going to sign, only to have the president rip the rug out from under them back in debt. and then the government shut down. so the question is, what will they do now? will they try to push him again, anything he can't, you know, make the same mistake, frankly, politic politically, that most of them believe he made again. >> right, because he was blamed for the shutdown. his poll numbers started going down, hundreds of thousands of
12:02 pm
americans were impacted with no paychecks. >> and despite the fact that he argues, the president argues, well, it shined a light on the problem at the border, it shined a light on the notion of border security, he lost. he lost on policy. he lost politically. so the question is, what now? kaitlan and kevin liptack, our reporters at the white house are hearing now a shift in tone from their sources. it is different from what i was told from people who spoke directly to the president. and this is reporting from just yesterday, that he did intend to sign it. the difference is real. the difference is, they have the 1,000-plus pages and that is always a very, very big potential pitfall when you have a giant bill. i mean, this is the reason there has historically been a big fight over, you know, these big bills, because you don't always know exactly -- >> and people can pick it at it. >> exactly. and in fairness to the president, he should be going through it to see what's in, everybody should be going through to it see what's in it, so they don't just pass
12:03 pm
something quickly and find out later, oops, it's not exactly what we thought it was. but having said all of that, just before coming on, i spoke with a senior republican who's got his pulse on sort of the political ramifications here who said that it's pretty clear the president does understand that it was bad politically the first hand and it would be worse a second time if there's a shutdown, even if it's short. because he needs to get his head in the game, not just about saying it's the base, he needs to broaden his coalition, finally, if he does want to win re-election. >> dana, stand by. much more to discuss. democratic congressman dan kildee of michigan is with us on capitol hill now. congressman, first, your reaction to this new reporting that aides to the president say they are less certain he will sign the spending bill? >> well, this is what happens when we have an unstable and erratic president. and that's something that we've come to understand about this presidency. the problem, though, is not so much him, because that's predictable.
12:04 pm
that he doesn't know what he's doing from one moment to the next. what's not acceptable, though, is that people like mitch mcconnell and others in the u.s. senate, who have been here and a part of this institution for a very long time, would completely give over the authority that their voters vested in them to an erratic, irresponsible president. when they know better. they negotiated this agreement in good faith. democrats and republicans, the house and the senate. we are going to vote on this legislation tonight. the senate should put it on the floor, and if they're petrified of the president and want to show that, by voting with him and shut the government down, that's on them. i don't think they'll do that. i think if, given the chance, they will rise to the occasion and they'll show the american people that they can be a part of a governing coalition that does not necessarily include this erratic, unstable president. >> what do you make of his change of heart? because our reporting in the last 24 hours was exactly the opposite. that he was ready to sign this. he didn't see it as everything
12:05 pm
that he wanted, but it was a down payment on his border wall. and he was going to get the rest one way or another. he didn't need congress to do it! do you think he's listening to someone else? is there right-wing media playing a role here? >> i'm sure that has something to do with it. it's very hard to predict donald trump's behavior. he either does not care about the consequences of the decisions that he's making or he doesn't know enough about those consequences to make an informed judgment. this is an example of how unprepared this person is for the office that he holds. the fact that he does not know, in this moment, what he should do, the responsible thing that he should do, is quite an indictment of the president of the united states. >> cnn reported earlier that the president was privately griping that democrats, your party, outplayed republicans on this. do you agree? did your party outplay the gop? >> well, we certainly accept the deal and so do the republican
12:06 pm
members who negotiated it. so i don't think it helps anyone to do a victory lap on this. i think this has been a colossal failure in many ways, that the government had to be shut down for 35 days for us just to get to this point. now, looking at the budget agreement itself, i'm fairly pleased with it. there are some elements that i don't like, but that's the nature of compromise. the problem wasn't so much who got the better deal, who did better. the problem was that the starting point for the president was so bad that it doesn't feel like there is any reasonable compromise that could have incorporated some of the things that he was asking for. so it may have just been too much for him to expect that he was going to walk away from this with some kind of a victory when the positions that he has been taking, the positions that he's taken so far, are really untenable. the threat of shutting the government down because there's a disagreement over what form border security should make is not a position that the american people want their president to take. >> i hear what you're saying.
12:07 pm
there is something to be said, though, isn't there, about this bill being released just last night, all, what is it, 1,600 pages or something. have you even read it all? >> we've gone through the detail. now, let's be clear. most of what is in this budget is information and language that has been in previous budgets. the descriptions of the various programs. there are moments when we get legislation that is so overwhelming and completely misunderstood, like the 2017 tax bill that the republicans rushed to the floor before the ink was dry, but this is the budget of the united states. it's the results of long deliberations over the appropriations process, for people involved in those negotiations have very clear understandings of what is in them. we have to look at those areas that are new or additional. and i've been taking a look at that and i'm relatively pleased with what i see. but i don't think it's a fair argument to say that this is like another piece of legislation that nobody ever saw before. it's the budget of the united states of america. people around here spend almost
12:08 pm
all of their time focusing on budget questions, so i don't think that's a fair criticism. >> senate majority leader mitch mcconnell spoke just moments ago. let's listen. >> i've just had an opportunity to speak with president trump, and he would, i would say to all my colleagues, has indicated that he's ready to sign the bill. he will also be issuing a national emergency declaration at the same time. and i've indicated to him that i'm going to prepare -- i'm going to support the national emergency declaration. so for all of my colleagues, the president will sign the bill. we'll be voting on it shortly. and with that, i ask the chair to lay before the senate the conference report to accompany house joint resolution 31. >> okay, the news is changing in realtime here. you just heard from mitch mcconnell. he says the president is going to sign the bill, but he's going to declare a national emergency and mitch mcconnell says he
12:09 pm
supports that. ya your reaction? >> well, i hope the senate acts fast before the president changes his mind again. he seems to change his mind on an hourly basis. i'm glad that they're moving forward. i do think it's an abdication of leader mcconnell's responsibility that he has to wait for permission from the president of the united states for him to do the job that he was elected to do. that's disappointing. obviously, we want to see this bill passed and we want the president to sign it. but frankly, we won't need the president's signature if the senate delivers a vote that's based on the true support for this legislation. we won't need the president's signature if the house were to deliver a vote based on what i know to be the true support for this bill. and the fact that the president's going to make an emergency declaration, many of us have serious questions about whether or not he has that authority. it may be that leader mcconnell felt that it's something that he had to give the president in order to get permission for him to take this vote to the floor. that's a really disappointing
12:10 pm
commentary, i suppose. but if we get this bill passed and the president signs it, i guess that's a step in the right direction. but it's not a very good way to run a government. >> congressman dan kildee, thank you very much for being with us. >> thank you. >> dana bash is here with me. your reaction to this reporting -- >> that was remarkable. i think we witnessed and we were maybe even a part of realtime reporting, as you said to the congressman, news is changing extremely fast. first, you know, we heard from kaitlan collins that they're hearing that the president is not so sure. manu talking to republican senators saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, i'm not going to put my name on this, i'm not going to give you my aye vote unless i know it's actually going somewhere, unless i know the president's going to sign it, and then mitch mcconnell -- maybe he just picked up the phone and called the president and said, i need you to say "yes" so i can go out and i can announce it to calm everybody down, to get this through, so we don't have another shutdown. >> i know, my mind went straight
12:11 pm
to those federal workers we were talking about, with another potential shutdown. >> exactly, but this was just warp speed, what just happened. and this is a move that a majority leader generally makes to go to the senate floor and make an announcement so that his members and members on the other side of the aisle hear it loud and clear. >> and fall in line. >> right. and that's what he did. but the fact that -- i get what the congressman is saying, you know, he's obviously -- he's a democrat, trying to say that mitch mcconnell's trying to get permission. but i think it's bigger than that. that mcconnell wants a big bipartisan vote. he wants republicans to vote for this. and he wants to make sure that when he does put it on the senate floor, it's going to get through. >> but this piece of the national emergency declaration. >> that's a big deal. >> that is a big deal. and is there republican support for that, even? >> well, the fact -- and we're going to have to dig a little bit more on this, i'm sure. our colleagues are outside the senate floor trying to talk to the majority leader as he's walking off the floor, if he does. because the fact that he said
12:12 pm
that he would support it would not be surprised if that was part of the give and take that he had in the conversation with the president or with somebody at the white house. because senator mcconnell has been very, very clear, not just privately with the president, but publicly, that a national emergency is a terrible idea. but from the president's perspective, he's getting a terrible deal, a deal that the democrats did pretty well on and he didn't, after all of this time. so, it's a give and take that it seems finally that mitch mcconnell is in the middle of and capitulating on, because this is the way to get the president to sign this bill and avert a shutdown to say, okay, you know, you can do your national emergency. this is not going to be the end of the discussion. it's the beginning of the discussion, the debate, and probably the almost certainly, the court fight over that national emergency. >> let's see where the discussion is headed right now on capitol hill. our phil matingly is there. phil, what are you hearing? >> reporter: well, in about 20 minutes, the senate is going to
12:13 pm
hold its first vote or a seerie of votes to actually move forward the spending bill. i think dana kind of nails it. what essentially occurred, or at least what we heard from the senate majority leader on the floor and when i've been told from people, and this is moving pretty fast, that the majority leader spoke to the president and the president was making clear that he had some reservations about the bill, as kaitlan collins and kevin liptack were reporting earlier, some were concerned that he might not sign it at all. it was essentially a trade-off. he was opposed to a national emergency, he made clear both publicly and privately that he was opposed to a national emergency. and if this was the deal that would get the president on deal with the spending bill, this is something the majority leader was willing to do. and i think it underscores what we've heard from republicans and democrats alike in both chambers over the course of the last couple of days. this was the only way out. there was no plan "b" here. and more importantly than just keeping the government open on friday night, this would clear the decks of a lot of issues, spending issues, spending
12:14 pm
crises, spending deadlines until the end of september, something both house democrats and the majority over there and senate republicans and the majority in that chamber want to be able to get off their plate to be able to move on on their agenda, on their proposals, their bills, their nominations in mitch mcconnell's case. this was the trade-off. it was a trade-off that apparently had to happen to be able to move this forward. and now they are moving forward. 3:30 will be the first votes. the senate should move pretty quickly after that. the expectation before things got lately dicey over the course of the last 90 minutes was that the bill would pass comfortably in the united states senate. when the house reconvenes later this evening, they expect to pass it comfortably, as well. so that part hasn't been in question. the question has been the president, the senate majority leader going to the house floor and announcing that essentially he has made a deal with the president to be able to clear the way for this spending bill, not only to pass both chambers of commerce, but also to be signed into law. the trade-off, the president is going to declare a national emergency and at least the republican leader, who is very skeptical of the idea, is going to support him when he does that, anp >> let's listen in, as the conversation continues right now
12:15 pm
inside the chamber. >> final four who did the negotiation. none of us sitting in that room would be an agreement that any of us individually would write. but there are also things in the bill that i support and things that i disagree with, witbut th could be said by all four of us, republicans and democrats. you try to find as much common ground as you can. everybody had to give something, but did we end up with a bipartisan compromise? we had to deal in facts that are based on reality, not rhetoric based on political fantasy. democrats have always supported border security. >> the democrat from vermont, top democrat on the appropriations committee. i want to bring in jeffrey toobin, cnn's chief legal analyst here. now we're hearing, jeffrey, that the president is prepared to
12:16 pm
declare a national emergency, as he signs this bill. so some time in the next 24 hours, we presume. we know there will be legal fights. what should we expect? >> well, there is a statute, a law on the books that allows a president to declare national emergency and spend money outside of what congress has authorized. and all recent presidents have done it. they have never done it in anything like these circumstances, where the congress has explicitly not decided to spend the money that the president is asking to spend. also, the fact that the president has waited so long to declare a national emergency may be an argument that there is no national emergency. that the fact that he waited for congress to act and only then declared the national emergency may argue against him. but the statute does give the
12:17 pm
president wide latitude. and i anticipate that many lawsuits will be filed as soon as the president tries to spend any of this money. and it will be up to the courts. and i have to say, i don't think it is clear how that will be resolved. i think it's a complicated legal question, the breadth of the president's authority under the national emergencies act. and then we'll see. but the one thing is for certain, it will be a court fight. and it may last for a quite a few number of months. >> so if there is a court fight, assuming that's where this goes, does that just then hit "pause" on this whole national emergency? is that how it would work? >> that's a great question. that would depend on whether a judge would issue a stay in the case. the president certainly is not going to stop just because a lawsuit is filed. he would only stop spending the money if a court told him to stop. and certainly one of the initial
12:18 pm
requests from the plaintiffs, whoever those plaintiffs turn out to be, and there will certainly be a lot of them, already for some sort of injunction for the money not to be spent, but that's a decision for the judge. and the injunction could likely be appealed, to an appeals court and then probably to the supreme court. so every step in the legal process will be highly contested, but one thing i think we can safely assume is that the president and thus the administration will no hit pause on spending this money, unless a court tells it to hit pause. and that will be one of the contested issues. >> all right. stand by, if you will. i want to play the rather contentious moment when mitch mcconnell interrupted republican senator chuck grassley on the floor. watch. >> allowing these tax credits, incentives to lapse, has created uncertainty for investors and the industry about the
12:19 pm
availability of these -- >> would the senator yield? >> -- jeopardizing the long-term investments necessary for the development of these biofuels. i hope the next time i get a chance to have the floor, i won't be interrupted. i yield the floor and put the rest of my statement in the record. >> both republicans, not exactly seeing eye to eye there. >> yeah, in fairness to senator grassley, i'm not sure the reason why he was asked to be quiet, so that mitch mcconnell -- i don't know the timing of this, but if you're -- if this is what you were saying, if he was -- was he being interrupted for mitch mcconnell? >> that's my understanding, as well. >> so that's why. because hep didn't understand that mitch mcconnell needed to come to the floor and say, i just got off with the president, i want to end the drama. >> mitch mcconnell, i have breaking news. >> i want to tell you, you, senator grassley, and everybody else in this chamber, he's going to sign it. no more guessing games, i put a call into him, i got him on the floor, i got him to commit, i had to give something, a pretty big something, which is
12:20 pm
philosophically mitch mcconnell is against the notion of a national emergency. >> in fact, i thought he had said earlier this week he would fight the national emergency declaration, should the president take that move. >> he did, but this is the art of compromise. you don't always get what you want. and what mitch mcconnell wanted and wants more than anything else right now is keep the government open and get on with it and move on, at least in the short-term and to do that, to get the president to say, okay, it seems pretty clea acquiesce emergency and make that clear that that's what the president said. >> all right. where do we go from here? that's the big question. dana bash, thank you so much for being my anchor buddy here as we walk through everybody with this. we'll continue our coverage of this breaking news. got to squeeze in a quick break. stay with us. ach other. but this time... those bonds were definitely tested.
12:21 pm
frog leg, for my baby brother don't frogs have like, two legs? so they should have two of these? since i'm active duty and she's family, i was able to set my sister up with a sweet membership from navy federal. if you hold it closer, it looks bigger. eat your food my big sis likes to make tiny food. and i'm okay with that. navy federal credit union. our members, are the mission. you see clear skin. cosentyx can help people
12:22 pm
with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis find clear skin that can last. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms, if your inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. how sexy are these elbows? ask your dermatologist about cosentyx. i couldn't catch my breath.
12:23 pm
it was the last song of the night. it felt like my heart was skipping beats. they said i had afib. what's afib? i knew that meant i was at a greater risk of stroke. i needed answers. my doctor and i chose xarelto® to help keep me protected from a stroke. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. warfarin interferes with at least 6 of your body's natural blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor. for afib patients well managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all
12:24 pm
planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. learn all you can to help protect yourself from a stroke. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. the best simple salad ever?d to help protect yourself from a stroke. great tasting, heart-healthy california walnuts. so simple, so good. get the recipes at ythen you turn 40 ande everything goes. tell me about it. you know, it's made me think, i'm closer to my retirement days than i am my college days. hm. i'm thinking... will i have enough? should i change something? well, you're asking the right questions. i just want to know, am i gonna be okay? i know people who specialize in "am i going to be okay." i like that. you may need glasses though. yeah. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today with td ameritrade.
12:25 pm
i've just had an opportunity to speak with president trump. and he, i would say to all of my colleagues, is prepared to sign the bill. he will also be issuing a national emergency declaration at the same time. and i've indicated to him that i'm going to prepare -- i'm going to support the national emergency declaration. so for all of my colleagues, the president will sign the bill, we'll be voting on it shortly. >> you heard it here in realtime. we brought you that, as mitch mcconnell made the announcement, the president will sign the bipartisan spending bill to avoid a shutdown. but, he'll also declare a national emergency. let's go to cnn's chief white house correspondent, jim acosta.
12:26 pm
jim, we've been zigging and he's been zagging. what happens? >> reporter: yeah. to follow the bouncing bill, is the way it's been today, ana. i think mitch mcconnell did something very stunning there a few moments ago to see the senate majority leader really get out ahead of the white house and announce what the president of the united states is going to do with something as big and important citizas preventing an costly government shutdown, i don't think you can, you know, underline that enough. that is a really stunning thing to take place, because, typically, what you would have, ana, as you know, the president would come out in some kind of pool spray or the white house press secretary would make an announcement or put out a statement. and ana, i'm getting the sense from talking to my sources over here, over here at the white house, that the right hand doesn't really know what the left hand is doing. there are aides describing all sorts of things behind the scene. i spoke to one official earlier today who said, we just got this
12:27 pm
bill in the middle of the night, it's over a thousand pages, it takes time to go through all of this, but the hand-wringing is just audible over here, as you have some aides very worried that the president is not going to sign this thing and plunge the entire country back into a government shutdown. and you saw some of that reflected in the reporting that came from my colleagues, kaitlan collins and kevin liptack earlier this afternoon, but as dana bash and i were reporting earlier this week, there are strong indications that the president wanted to sign this, intended to sign this, was likely to sign it because there were these concerns that the president, real political concerns, that the president just could not afford politically to do this all over again. and so i just think it is just so striking and so stunning to see the senate majority leader, mitch mcconnell, get out ahead of this. we're hearing from our capitol hill colleagues, just in the last couple of hours, ana, that there were senators saying, we don't know what to do. we don't know whether to come out and support this thing, because we don't want the rug pulled out from under us like
12:28 pm
the president did to us last time. and so i think all of that past was prologue and the president really, i think, got preempted a little bit here by mitch mcconnell. mitch mcconnell came out and basically said to the president of the united states, the jig is up, the game is over, and it's time to, you know, get the country moving past this wall on the border cliff that we've been dealing with over the last several weeks. just a stunning move by mitch mcconnell to get out there and put an end to all of this. if that's, in fact, what's going to happen. of course, the president could pull the rug out from under him, again. but i don't think -- i don't think the president would do that, if mitch mcconnell were to get out in front of the cameras. that, i think, is a pretty clear indication that we're finally coming to an end of all of this brinksmanship, ana. >> cnn political analyst april ryan and kirsten powers are joining ours conversation here. jim acosta, thank you for your latest reporting. let me go to april ryan and get what you are hearing and why you think the president had this sort of change of heart in the
12:29 pm
last few hours, it appears, from going to he's going to sign it, all indications are he's going to sign it, we were hearing from senators in his party earlier today, everybody was pointing him that direction, this is what you should do, this is what's best for you, this is what's best for the country, and then there was all of this drama. >> yeah. well, you know, at the base of this, ana, is the fact that the president is not getting the $5.7 billion. that's at the base. he wants $5.7 billion. he's getting $1 billion plus. so what he's going to try to do in declaring this state of emergency, if this is, indeed, what's going to happen, he's going to try to start grabbing funds, from different agencies, be it defense, wherever, to fund this wall. and then you're going to see a court action from congress. they're going to go and try to stop this. congress, you have to remember, is the spending authority as well as the taxing authority. they don't want to see this, but the president has said he didn't want a government shutdown. but it's not over until it's
12:30 pm
signed or it's spoken, you know, and just being here for the last two years in this white house, or two plus years, you know, it didn't sit well with the president. he did not look good in this, with the government shutdown and how the democrats played. and this is now his sucker punch, if you want, or his punch, whichever way you want to make it. but he is going to, if indeed this is the case, declare a national emergency, he's going to start trying to take money wherever, from everywhere, from every agency, to fund this wall at the tune of at least $5.7 billion that he called for. >> kirsten, we've been listening in to the ongoing conversation on the senate floor and i'm being told that senator schumer just said that he hopes the president doesn't declare an emergency. any chance now that it's out there for mitch mcconnell, that this is exactly what's going to happen, that the president actually doesn't? >> well, i mean, it seems like this is sort of the deal that was made, because mitch mcconnell, i don't think he's
12:31 pm
probably particularly excited about this, but this is the only way to get the president to go along with it because of the backlash to the base and so i think that this is something that everyone should be thinking about what kind of precedent this would set if this is what's considered a national emergency. national emergencies are usually, you know, involving something like terrorism or the iran hostage crisis. they're not for what is frankly a manufactured crisis at the border, and we saw this in the most recent sort of dueling rallies on the border, where you had all of the leaders in el paso come out, including the republican mayor and say, what you're saying about el paso is not true. there isn't a crisis here. and the things you're saying about the fence, you know, and how it's affected, you know, crime in this area, is not true. so even when he went to try to highlight this crisis, the people, including the republican mayor said, that's just simply not what's happening here. so, people -- republicans need to really think about, when
12:32 pm
there's a democratic president in the future and they say, we believe that there is an actual crisis, something i actually do think is a crisis, the environmental crisis, and either you give us everything we want, the president -- >> kirsten, i'm going to interrupt you. i'm sorry, we are hearing now from nancy pelosi, the house speaker. let's listen. >> -- celebrated the life of chairman john dingell at holy trinity church in georgetown. and right now many of our colleagues are in north carolina to get celebrate the life of walter jones, our colleague from north carolina. a beautiful, lovely man. i've served with him skpervand with his father, who different parties. his father, a democrat, walter, a republican. but both of them southern gentlemen, patriotic americans, both of the joneses, and certainly walter jones and john dingell. today is also a day of sadness, because it marks the one-year
12:33 pm
anniversary of the parkland tragedy of gun violence. one year ago, america's heart was broken by the horrific act of violence in parkland, florida. today, we remember the 17 lives that were stolen from us then. i'm very pleased that last night, the house judiciary committee and the leadership of jerry nadler with the full participation of our members took a strong step to end the epidemic of gun violence and they advanced hr-8, the bipartisan common sense background legislation. our committees are hard at work, i'm very proud of our freshman. i think i've said to you before that in this freshman class, we had 18 chairs of subcommittees. to contrast that to the over -- and other historic freshman class of babies when they came in with all the sighs of enthusiasm that they did, they
12:34 pm
didn't have one subcommittee chair in the first year that they took office. so we're very proud that 18 of them have gavels, by all accounts, from our chairman, they've come enthusiastic, well prepared, all of the members, especially, of course, our subcommittee chairs. so we're very hard at work on our for the people agenda. while we're waiting for the senate to pass the conference report, the bipartisan, bicameral conference report, which i understand is imminent in the senate and then we'll vote on it later today. so that's real progress, i think, for us to have left it to the appropriators to make the decisions, come up with a bicameral, bipartisan bill that we can overwhelmingly support. but at the same time, we are working on our for the people agenda. our for the people agenda, first and foremost, said it was going to lower health care costs by lowering the cost of prescription drugs. we've already had a committees,
12:35 pm
the ways and means committee and the oversight committee, government reform and oversight committee have already had hearings on the price of precipitation drugs. our second point in the for the people agenda was to lower health care costs, bigger paychecks, by building the infrastructure of america. and again, last week, the transportation infrastructure committee held a hearing with representative, private and public sector, the mayor of los angeles, representing our nation's mayors, governor walls, representing our governors, and others participating there. a third point in the for the people agenda is hr-1, to reduce the role of big, dark special interests money in politics, lower voter suppression, and increase the voice of everyday americans in our political system, to restore confidence in our political system and we've
12:36 pm
already had an outside of washington hearing outside the leadership of marcia in brownsville, texas, great participation from our members, including our distinguished witness, mr. kyburn participating. and here this week, we've had the homeland security committee having a hearing on hr-1 as it relates to the integrity of our elections and we have the house administration committee having hearing on that as well again, a part of our hr-1, the first ten resolutions of the house, the first ten bills, we're very pleased that we're advancing the for the people agenda, but also hr-8, the gun violence prevention bill. probably, i think we were scheduled to report out 2, that
12:37 pm
bill sand mr. kyburn's initiatie on south carolina which has bipartisan, bicameral support. just a word future on the agreement that we will be vote votingi inon later today. in addition to the pieces on homeland security, which are very important. and by the way, the homeland security budget is a big budget. it's not just about the mexico border. it's about ice off of alaska and other ports of our border that are not necessarily the southern part. and i'm very pleased that some long-advocated for pieces are now in that budget, as well. so when you talk about the size of the budget, it's broader than the u.s./mexico border. but the bill that we will be passing a long overdue pay raise for federal employees to make them on par with military
12:38 pm
employees, as they have always been. and an additional $1 billion for the census to combat the administration's assault and to ensure for accurate -- a fair, accurate count. $3 billion to keep communities safe by combatting the opioid epidemic and hiring more police officers. $1 -- $17 billion to rebuild america's infrastructure. billions of dollars in support of small businesses. more than $9 billion to protect clean air, clean water, and public lands. $9.1 billion in security assistance for our allies and $7.4 billion for global health and nutrition assistance. so this is a very important legislation. there were six appropriations bills that were not agreed to and not as controversial and then the homeland security bill, which produced the result that today we will keep government
12:39 pm
open and that's very important for the american people. but we will also, as we do so, protect our borders and protect our values. >> madam speaker? >> yes, ma'am? >> the president just said that he will declare a national emergency when he signs this bill. do you still plan to file a legal challenge if and when he does that? and how quickly -- >> did i ever say i was filing a legal challenge? >> you said democrats -- >> i may, that's an option, and we'll review our options. but it's important to note that when the president declares this emergency, first of all, it's not an emergency. what's happening at the border. it's a humanitarian challenge to us. the president has tried to sell a bill of goods to america. but putting that aside, just in terms of the president making an end run around congress, hear he said out of respect, what the committee will do, and then walks away from it. but in any event, the president is doing an end run about
12:40 pm
congress, about the power of the purse. you've heard me say over and over again, article i, the legislative branch, the power of the purse, the power to declare war, many other powers listed in the constitution, and of course, the responsibility to have oversight. so the president is doing an end run around that. it is. we will review our options and be prepared to respond appropriately to it. i know the republicans have some unease about it, no matter what they say, because if the president can declare an emergency on something that he has created as an emergency, an illusion that he wants to convey, just think of what a president with different values can present to the american people. you want to talk about a national emergency? let's talk about today, the one-year anniversary of another manifestation of the epidemic of gun violence in america. that's a national emergency. why don't you declare that emergency, mr. president?
12:41 pm
i wish you would. but a democratic president can do that. a democratic president can declare emergencies, as well. so the precedent that the president is setting here is something that should be met with great unease and dismay by the republicans. and of course, we will respond accordingly, when we review our options. first, we have to see what the president actually says. >> speaker pelosi? >> yes. >> to that end, there has been some discussion of a resolution in the house that might force republicans to go on the record and vote -- would that be an option? >> i'm saying that we're reviewing our options. we have to see what the president will say. this, i don't believe that the -- that there's any good faith negotiations to have with the republicans in congress if they're going to support the president doing an end run about what the will of the people, the congress of the united states has put forth so we will review our options and i'm not prepared to give any preference to any
12:42 pm
one of them right now. yes, sir? >> on the news of the past couple of months, that the president told the senate majority leader he would sign the bill, you must be pleased with that. but on the national emergency, does that change the vote calculus at all? obviously, if you have the president saying he's going to sign a piece of legislation, he would say, okay, i would vote for that, but also that caveat, that could potentially be a few votes away. does that have any impact? >> let's just have the vote. that's very interesting, but let's just have the vote? >> does that change support one way or another? >> it is interesting to see how the vote, the president has said to the republican leadership in the senate, senator shelby, a senior opera senior, a respected leader in the united states snad senaenat
12:43 pm
don't have confidence in what you did, even though the president failed to convince the american people and their representatives in congress of his position. but let's just see what the votes are. who knows what the calculus is on the other side. >> doesn't look like your side of the aisle? >> madam speaker, as far as the gun control bill or the background check bill is a concern, you just said that a national emergency should, declared -- >> well, could be declared. if you want to talk about an emergency, that's a national emergency. >> that's something that you would like to see a president declare? >> no, i'm just saying that a president could do that. if you want to go down that path, then let's look at what really is a national emergency. i'm not advocating for any president doing an end run around congress. i'm just saying that the republicans should have some dismay about the door that they are opening, the threshold they are crossing. >> madam speaker, in your opening comments, you spoke some about the freshman class.
12:44 pm
there have been a number of viral moments that some of these new democratic -- >> that's the word, viral, viral, viral. that's your question now, the viral moments. >> i wanted to ask you about what you thought of their influence? do these dem freshman have an outsize influence that you've never seen before? >> no. this is welcome to the democratic party. we are not a rubber stamp for anybody. we are not a monolith. we have never been. and who would want to lead a party that would be described that way. the members come, they bring their nuchls, their priorities. we welcome that. and they are not programmed. they are spontaneous, prepared, and i'm proud of them. >> last question. >> okay? >> yes, sir. >> again, you mentioned the anniversary of parkland several times and the legislation you're bringing to the floor. >> yes. >> enjoys broad support. >> yes. >> other legislation to that end, not quite as popular around
12:45 pm
the country, although it's more popular among the democratic caucus than probably ever. are you committed to bringing to the floor some further legislation to that end, such as the restoration of the ban on assaul assault-style weapons? >> well, the committee -- the judiciary committee and the committees of jurisdiction will review any proposals that we have on any subject. and what they have put prioritized, and we have, in addition to the committee, we have a task force headed up by congressman mike thompson of california that's worked in a bipartisan way to protect the american people. what are the measures that save the most lives? and how do we get them into law, a proposal that turns into legislation, that it passes as law, that makes a difference in the lives of the american people. and it's you want to committee and the task force to make their proposals as we go forward.
12:46 pm
we do think that the keeping guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them probably saves the most lives. thank you all, very much. >> thank you. thank you. >> oh, happy valentine's day. all we need is love and chocolate, right? >> what time are you voting? can we still go to the valentine's day dinner? >> that would be the hope. it depends on how soon the republican -- the republican? the senate takes up the bill. we said that we wouldn't vote before 6:30, because that's when our members come back from north carolina. but we hope not to have it be one minute after that. so, you'll have time for dinner. thank you all very much. >> nancy pelosi now responding to the declaration from the senate majority leader, mitch mcconnell, that the president will sign the spending bill, but he's going to declare a national emergency in order to get his border wall at the border. let me bring in cnn's david chalian, who's joining us to react to what we just heard from
12:47 pm
pelosi. key line here. she says, the president is doing an end round on congress. she said republicans should have a problem with that, too, and this is potentially dangerous precedent if, in fact, the president declares this national emergency and goes the route in which it looks like it's going to go here, david. >> reporter: that's right, ana. you saw she was trying to do two things at the same time, one, saying, hey, no president should be doing this, don't do an end run around congress, but hey, i'm also trying to tell you, if there's a democratic president one day, perhaps he or she will declare the democratic party's policy initiatives to be an emergency. she used today's anniversary of the shooting in parkland as an example. she said that perhaps a democratic president would make the guns crisis in the country as they see it a national emergency and that that may be something that republicans look back on this day and realize that by going along with the president and declaring a national emergency, it opens the
12:48 pm
door to that type of precedent. when pressed on that, she said, most of all, she's not in favor of any president in any party trying to do an end run around congress. >> and most americans don't even support an emergency. what do the polls say on this? >> this is amazing. when we were in the field last week with our poll asking this question, you see on the screen there, two-thirds are not in favor of it, but as we discussed at the time, this is the bind that donald trump was in. whether he took a position here of being in favor of a national emergency action, even though the country is opposed it, but republicans are fully supportive of it, ana. 64% of republicans are in favor of using this tool of a national emergency to achieve this goal and fulfill this campaign promise. conservative republicans even in a greater number support it. so the president's base will be quite pleased with this decision to enact a national emergency to achieve this fundamental promise that he has made over and over again. it is their way of victory that
12:49 pm
he doesn't retreat here, even though he's signing a government funding bill that doesn't necessarily make conservatives sort of sing with joy. >> but dana, a lot of republican senators, other lawmakers, have not been onboard with this emergency declaration idea. they've been very vocal about it, in fact. and what nancy pelosi brought up in that press conference is the reason why. >> exactly. and we're already seeing some e-mails from our colleagues on capitol hill talking to republicans, senior republicans like roy blunt, for example, from missouri, saying just that. still saying, this is a bad idea, this is a bad precedent. the fact that mitch mcconnell, now that we're digesting this, the fact that mitch mcconnell was, and in his heart, still is in that camp, that declaring a national emergency sets a terrible precedent of going around congress, and yet still went on the senate floor and said it was okay says one of two
12:50 pm
things, maybe both. one, maybe the president said, i'm not going to do this, mitch. i'm not -- i can't sign this. it's just not enough. and mitch mcconnell gave him a big, big rhetorical win, or a big win in general, by or two, he is just over the drama, that the deadline is approaching. we're almost there. we're going to have a potential shutdown even if it gets dragged out. it could sproobl been both of those, but it is really telling. the other thing i would say, for reasonable people out there, who have said over and over again, i'm so sick of the hypocrisy in washington. add this to the top of the list. i'm have iing flashbacks of republican after republican calling barack obama an imperial president when he went around congress on a number of things, not the least of which was daca,
12:51 pm
was daca. it's because congress couldn't act and because congress didn't act that he went ahead and did it. something he thought was important. exactly what donald trump is doing. >> republicans could override the president here on this issue of the shutdown. they could have come out, looking like the heroes, the republicans in congress, if the president were to veto the spending bill and it comes back to congress and they overrule that. >> they could have. that would take a lot of -- >> what does that tell you, though, about the control this president has over the party? >> a lot. the president has a lot of control over the party. and, more importantly, it's the president controlling the party but it's the president's base aligning with their base. meaning, republicans in kentucky, mitch mcconnell's home state, support the president and they're also the people mitch mcconnell is relying on for
12:52 pm
re-election in this election cycle. that's just one example. so they dovetail. so, yes, the republicans could stand up and they could stand with democrats and let's just say they say national emergency say terrible idea. we're not going to be with you on this, mr. president. we're going to approve this compromise. we're going to send it to you. if you veto it, this is what you're saying, ana, we're going to override your veto. it's possible but would be politically suicidal for most of these republicans, even in big states in the senate, in red states, to do that because it is the president's base that will probably get behind him on that rather than the members. >> but is the base enough? april, i know you had something that you wanted to chime in with. >> yeah. >> let me throw it to you with this and you can add on. bottom line is two-thirds of americans do not support the president declaring a national emergency on this, yet he thinks that is his best option?
12:53 pm
>> yeah. well, there's a reason why. there's an impact on people, ana. there's an impact on national security. let's say the president does do this, declare a national emergency, as we're hearing. you know, he could go to the department of defense and pull money from the department of defense. and that could, in turn, create a national security issue. he could go to fema and pull funding for emergency or disaster relief. that affects people. this is not just talking about one end of pennsylvania avenue to another, congress versus the white house. this is about national security. this is also about, you know, people possibly losing their jobs if projects from different organizations -- money is pulled from that. we're almost back at the same thing with the shutdown. it will impact people, national security as well as, you know, possibly not having services work the way they are. and people could lose their jobs with this as well. >> when we talk about precedent and if the president makes this
12:54 pm
move, assuming everything holds based on what we heard from mitch mcconnell. we're also now getting a statement from the white house. let me read it to you real fast from sarah sanders. she says president trump will sign the government funding bill. and he will also take other executive action against a national emergency to ensure we stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the border. the president is once again delivering on his promise to build the wall, protect the border and secure our great country. let's go to chris cilizza to explain why republican lawmakers aren't fans of this move. >> that's putting it mildly, ana. let's go through it. remember, donald trump has floetd a national emergency repeatedly, and he has backed away from it each time. apparently not now. let's put it in historical context. 1976 national emergencies act is passed to codify in ways in which the president of the united states can use emergency powers. that doesn't mean it was never
12:55 pm
used before but major national crises are one way in which these are made. after 9/11, during the iraq war to mobilize as many resources as possible. during the great depression, obviously this was prethat legislation i talk about but fdr actually closed banks because he didn't want a run on banks and didn't want a bunch of banks to fail. he closed banks until they could solidify them. swine flu, h1n1. obama said we're going to open up every hospital, every facility. this one is fascinating. postal workers went on strike in 1970. richard nixon put national guardsmen out to deliver the mail. he declared a national emergency to do that. this is the most common way in which national emergencies are issued. of the 58 that's been issued since 1976, since that national emergency act, 31 are still ongoing. most of them are dealing with
12:56 pm
sanctions to foreign countries to ensure that they continue to behave. this one was bill clinton. he said nuclear proliferation was such a threat he had to address it with a national emergency. this is interesting. little bit of arcana but could be important. if trump declares a national emergency, and we think he's going to to -- trump declares national emergency. nancy pelosi, we just saw, the house could pass a privileged resolution, ana, which say we condemn this, we think it's a mistake. here he is, smiling mitch. it would make the senate have to vote because it's a privileged resolution. the senate would have to vote on it. it would essentially be a -- is a national emergency a good thing or bad thing? it would also be a stand in for is the border wall the right move or not?
12:57 pm
for what an executive can do with the money. that's why mitch mcconnell resisted for so long and why the big story here, ana, is mitch mcconnell is setting a huge precedent as it relates to what the executive branch can do when it comes to congress' always existing power to allocate money. >> such a good point. chris cilizza thank you for breaking it down for us. let's give our final thought to david chalian on the current state of play. >> to that last point chris was making and what dana was saying before, the real-world political impact of what the longest shutdown in history was about. it moved mitch mcconnell off position. see, the republicans felt so burned by that last shutdown, as did donald trump, his numbers took a hit. it was very bad politics for him and his party and now we see the result of that at all costs and it seems costs of mitch mcconnell changing his position
12:58 pm
and allowing this precedent, that's the cost now, for avoiding another shutdown, which they deem would be politically worse, donald trump was able to use that threat of another shutdown to move mcconnell off that position. >> i have a couple of more minutes. kierstin powers, i want to go to you. what did you make of nancy pelosi's response? >> it's what you would expect and it's how many members of congress, even republican members, would have to feel this is an end run. it is a deal struck between democrats and republicans. it sets a terrible precedent, as she pointed out. in the future, i don't think republicans would like it very much. i think what's happening with mulch mcconnell, he's probably just dealing with the crisis that's closest to him. the crisis that's closest to him is the government shutting down. and if there's a national emergency, that doesn't necessarily mean the president will get the money. he will try to get the money, but there may be ways to stop
12:59 pm
him. not mitch mcconnell is going to stop him but other people might be able to stop him. i think he probably feels like i just have to make sure that the government adopt get shut down. i'm not defending it. the better way would be to get the votes to override the veto. that would be very, very hard to do, considering how many of the numbers would be afraid, frankly, of the backlash and going against the president. >> dana, we have 30 seconds. you're working the phone, working sources and trying to report out. what are you learning? >> well, we're trying to -- obviously the key question is what happened in that phone call between mitch mcconnell and the president. we don't have to dig too deep to come to the conclusion that phil was talking about, that i was talking about that is now very transparent, which is mitch mcconnell knows how to get himself out of a pickle, out of a political pickle. and he had the chip of a national emergency, which he had
1:00 pm
made abundantly clear, he thought was a bad idea. and he used it to try to end this. he used it with and, frankly, against -- not against but on the other side of a negotiation with the president of the united states. >> dana bash, thank you very much. thank you to all of our contributors. jake tapper picks up our special coverage from washington now. welcome to "the lead." i'm jake tapper. capitol hill in a varitable frenzy this hour, that president trump might not sign that spending bill to keep the government funded because there wasn't enough money to fund his wall. he went on the record saying the president will sign the bill and will also declare a national emergency in an attempt to get more border wall funding. senate majority leader mitch mc