Skip to main content

tv   Washington Today  CSPAN  January 22, 2018 6:58pm-8:00pm EST

6:58 pm
grimm, the intelligence community could extend funds as it sees fit and that is the statement from senator burr, who is the chair of the senate intelligence committee and we carried it on live. christine, you get the last word, republican line, your reaction to today eye developments. caller: well, i feel like this. send all them immigrants back over there and our jobs come back open and quick penalizing our children and our elders and our military. that's how i feel. host: again to recap, the house earlier today and the senate passing a bill that will keep the federal government in operation through february 8 and the house is now in recess and meet for a pro forma session on thursday. the senate is in session this
6:59 pm
week and follow it on all of the c-span networks. and online any time at a rebroadcast of "washington today" and live on c-span radio. >> the bill before us, three things that every republican and democrat should be able to support. first, it ends the shutdown and restores full funding for the federal government through february 8. second, it extends health insurance for nine million vulnerable children and third, it will enable congress to resume bipartisan talks on the important issues facing our nation. host: with that, the federal government is beginning to reopen after a weekend shutdown
7:00 pm
that moved into a third day and welcome to "washington today." it is monday, january 22. we have a new countdown clock, 17 days until the government funding runs out. today is a short-term continuing resolution which expires on february 8 in exchange for ending the stale mate, republicans have promised to take up the daca bill. steve scalise returned to the capitol after surgery that was art of his recovery from a gunshot suffered at a congressional baseball game practice. the court ordered pennsylvania lawmakers to redraw their congressional map ahead of the
7:01 pm
2018 mid-term elections. vice president pence announced the u.s. embassy will open in jerusalem before the end of the next year and he said the door is open for palestinians to enter negotiations. we begin with this headline. transpired is earlier today. senator schumer: i expect the majority leader to abide by this agreement. if he does not, of course, and i expect he will, he will have breached the trust of not only the democratic senators, but members of his own party as well. through these complicated and lengthy negotiations, democrats have always sought to be reasonable, to act in good faith and get something real done.
7:02 pm
the te all of our entreaty president was stoib gnat. despite bipartisan support for daca, the republican majority dithered. host: the senate democratic leader chuck schumer. joins us live here is bob cusack. what a weekend. guest: both parties were playing chicken. now republicans are basically getting what they want and that's different than prior shutdowns we've seen in the clinton administration and obama administration, without a doubt there's a lot of frustration with senator shume own capitol hill and among immigration activists. host: what happened between last night, we heard senator schumer on the senate floor, and mid morning today? guest: i think the pressure from centrist democrats, they got more and more nervous. if you think about it, friday's vote was to advance the funding bill. five democratic senators voted
7:03 pm
for it. fast forward to today on the procedural motion and there were 333 senators who caucused with the democrats who -- who caucus with the democrats who backed basically the same bill. the timeline was a little different. the republicans were unified in their message. very aggressive. in 2013 when they were trying to get rid of obamacare funding they were not. they were on their heels. this situation was different, the republicans felt they had the upper hand. a lot of democrats are saying they blinked. >> let's go through some of the senate democrats who did not support today's action. senator sanders of verm, elizabeth warren of massachusetts, ka ma la harris of california, kristen jill grand of new york. what do they all have in common? guest: they're all thinking about running for president. those candidate whors thinking bout, who are in the senate, they were critical of what
7:04 pm
senator schumer struck. another vote i thought was interesting, senator tester who is up for re-election voted against this but without a doubt you were seeing, we've written about the intra-party fights on the right. there's a lot of intra-party fights on the left. schumer was stuck between his centrist democrats running in red state this is juror and the 2020 possible presidential candidate. host: your colleague was reporting there was a smile on the face of senator mcconnell heas heard the reaction from chuck schumer on the senate floor. guest: yeah, and you don't see mitch mcconnell smile much he keeps his cards to his vest he said there will be no shutdown. the shutdown did happen butic he was surprised that schumer played this card because remember you go back to december, right before christmas a similar type of stopgap bill got a lot of support. less than 70 senator bus enough to advance it.
7:05 pm
this time shouper -- schumer said we're not going to go for this. that the only -- there could be another shutdown. this was over a timeline. i think some democrats are saying, well, we lost the battle but we're going to win the war because we're going to get a dreamer package. we'll see. host: and here on the senate floor, senate leader mitch mcconnell. senator mcconnell: i thank the gentleman for his comments and his indication he intends to support the measure before us. i think if we've learned anything, i think if we've learned anything during this process it's that a strategy to shut down the government over the issue of illegal immigration is something that the american people didn't understand. and would not have understood in the future. so i'm glad we've goten past that. we have a chance now to get back to work. and therefore, mr. president, i
7:06 pm
ask unanimous consent that the demand for a quorum call be waived. host: earlier the republicans were going after chuck schumer the democrats. gip they were. and the reason they were was to increase their leverage. i think they won the p.r. battle over the weekend. i saw far more republicans being aggressive and hammering the fact that these democrats didn't oppose a lot of what was in the bill, they just wanted the dreamer package as part of this bill and they just kept ham thearg home without a doubt and i think they were active on television stations. that i think changed the dynamic but still i think a lot on the left wanted schumer to continue to battle that he should have continued to fight until they got a lot more. guest: we're talking to rob -- host: we're talking to bob usack, and on the phone is
7:07 pm
jerry connolly, thank you for being with us here on c-span and c-span radio. what happened among congressional democrats? mr. connolly: i disagree with what bob said fundamentally. if you compare what mitch friday night. he said i'll shave a week off the c.a. and i will agree that if we haven't dealt with some of these issues including the dreamers i will give you floor time to allow that to proceed.
7:08 pm
there's a lot of conventional wisdom about democrats blinking first. come february 8, if the republicans haven't allowed us to proceed the entire discussion is going to be on round of our choosing. i'm looking forward to reopening the government. we didn't get everything but if you're disappointed, we're in the minority in the senate and the house. host: let me get your retooks your colleague, luis gutierrez, he said, democrats are still not willing to go to the mat to allow people in my community to live in our country legally. mr. connolly: it's easier to blame your friends than to actually hold the people who
7:09 pm
cause the problem. democrats didn't create this problem. it wasn't a democrat who resigneded the -- rescinded the executive order. i love luis but i have to disagree with him here. he's picking on the wrong people here. when we do that, i think we eat our own young and it sets the cause we all share back. host: nancy pelosi was critical of this deal. number one, do you think going forward into february, the next deadline that house democrats should have more of a say into whatever is struck and number two, luis gutierrez said he's
7:10 pm
willing to trade, he'll trade the trump wall far deal on dreamers. do you agree with that? mr. connolly: luis is disappointed in democrats for not somehow insisting the government stay shut until something happened. i don't know what that would be given the fact that we're in the minority. but he's also now willing to give away trump's wall that was promised to be paid for by the mexicans. i had no say in that. no one asked my opinion of whether i'm willing to live with a wall. and i thought just a week or two ago that that was a nonstarter. that was a deal breaker. any inclusion of a wall in any r. up until this point was anathema to the democratic caucus. that was our position and luis had that position. guest: what about
7:11 pm
communication? do you want house democrats to have more say when the final, final deal is struck, assuming there is one? mr. connolly: absolutely. i think there has to be a lot manufacture discussion within our ranks about strategy and about the outcome that are realistic, that we're seeking. host: congressman connolly, i the it's been a busy day and vote this is evening, thanks for joining us here on c-span and c-span radio. mr. connolly: it's my great pleasure to see the democrats win one tonight. host: and one more question, will federal employees including those in your district receive back pais for today? mr. connolly: our understanding is that the bill coming from the senate will include restoration of any lost salary. i hope that's accurate. host: thanks for being with us. bob, let's go down memory lane you probably remember this on aturday morning, let's listen.
7:12 pm
[video clip] ♪ i'm a bill just a bill i'm stuck on capitol hill a few key congressmen debate will the nation let me be a law i hope and pray that they will but today i am still just a ill ♪ host: you remember that? guest: i do remember that. that's probably the extent of my knowledge when i came to washington about politics. i thought it was helpful. host: i played this because that's not the way the process is working today. guest: no, it's far more complicated. i have a lot of friends who are not washington insiders who are saying, what is going on to get through this complicated prosofse attaching passed stuff, how does it get passed, and ping-ponged back between the house and senate. those were simpler times.
7:13 pm
host: will it change in the mid-term election? guest: i don't think so. there are members pushing for reforms for an open process, certainly in the house, whether it's democrats or the republicans, the majority usually limits amendments so they can drive home their agenda. i don't think so. i think the only chance for reforms to the process, and it is kind of a crazy process, some things are added at the last second, handwritten on the side. i think if the house majority in 2019 is very narrow, well, then, maybe some members will demand and they'll band together and say, we need to have more of an open process at least in the house. host: we have a new countdown clock, 17 days, about 2 na weeks what does that mean? guest: they've got to get another deal in that amount of time. that's not a lot of time. the house members after this vote will be leaving. they're not scheduled to be here this week they're not going to get much of anything done.
7:14 pm
then it comes down to less than two weeks. so they've got to get a deesm i think it's going to be difficult. as you know, steve, congress has been debating immigration reform for over a decade. george w. bush tried to get it. he said i'll see you at the bill signing ceremony that didn't happen. the senate five years ago passed a bipartisan bill, didn't move in the house. so even a small issue like the dreamers which is not comprehensive immigration reforl, i think will be very difficult to get any type of deal in 17 days. host: this shutdown looked and felt very different than 2013. no barricades along the world war ii memorial. there was a headline at politico that the trump white house wanted to make this, quote a kinder and gentler shutdown. what was the reasoning behind this? gip mick mulvaney, who was in charge of the shutdown, said we're not going to weapon size it like though ba ma administration did for leverage. the obama administration said
7:15 pm
they -- did use it for leverage. this was mostly a weekend shutdown so really the question was, would parks be open, of course today people didn't know whether they should go into work. now obviously they'll be back to work tomorrow. i think with a different approach that this white house took and probably paid off a bit. host: this is a headline from "mother joans" saying the senate democrats have traded one looming problem from another. in taking the deal democrats have drawn the wrath of fired up activists in the base that feel betrayed. i mention that from "mother jones," there's a similar headline at associated press, joining us live is julie tate, the washington bureau chief for a.p. thanks for being here with us. let me ask you about your story and reaction from democrats on the action by senator schumer today. >> immigration advocates and liberals have been at this back
7:16 pm
and forth with schumer for a couple of months over what to do with daca. you saw at the end of the year 20 17 a lot of frustration over the fact that schumer didn't push democrats to hold the line on that c.r. then in january, we saw a lot of immigration advocates were heartened by the fact that schumer seemed he was going to take this. but you see them flip back again. they're frustrated that this was only a three-day shutdown. they feel like there's no way that mitch mcconnell and paul ryan will make good on a promise to put something on immigration on the floor. and frankly that's not even what they've been promised at this point. it's a promise from mcconnell to debate these issues. host: could we find ourselveses in the same situation in another 2 1/2 weeks? >> absolutely. i think that's frustrated people so michigan.
7:17 pm
we've hurtled from one crisis to another. you could envision a scenario in early to mid february where we're having the exact same debate. democrats are pushing for daca, for immigration to be part of the spending bill or at least for there to be a separate bill that gets passed before they approve more government funding and republicans say no, this is about keeping the government open. i don't think that democrats got much of a guarantee that this will go any different in february. host: let me turn to bob cusack, manager and editor in chief of "the hill" newspaper. guest: i want to get your take on what the role of the administration, the president made vulgar remarks behind closed doors that het set back talks, when you talk to people on both sides of the aisle we're talking democrats are saying yeah, we didn't win this battle, maybe we'll win down the road. republicans spiking the football, how do you think trump did in this? is he a winner of this or a loser of this big battle? >> i think he's a little bit of both. in talking to democratic aides
7:18 pm
over the weekend they pointed to that moment when he was in the oval office, made those vulgar remarks, as a turning point for the caucus. a moment where the moderates, some of these folks up for re-election in november said you know what, we can't hang with the president on this one. % no audio] but i think the president also stayed quiet for the weekend and that, frankly, helped. guest: that's true. where does this put the senate democratic lead her headline at a.p. is schumer's decaying hurts schumer. is this his first major test since taking over from harry reid? >> yes. this is a party that's been
7:19 pm
languishing, they could make arguments on health care but ultimately republicans stopped that from going forward. this is the first moment where you saw democrats being able to actually exert some rev raj -- leverage and schumer got a lot of praise from the liberals in the caucus from liberal activists last week for the position he was taking but you're really seing that shift today. host: one final question, i'll first pose it to bob and then get your reaction, julie. if the shutdown continued into the week, where would that have put schumer? guest: i think he made the decision it would have hurt his party. democrats had a good 2017. trump did not get any big legislative win until the end of the year. he did get a big win on the tax bill. but i think some of these democrats in trump states who are up for re-election were thinking, things are going pretty well for me. this was risk. once the shutdown happened, it was risky for both sides. i think democrats saw, it's
7:20 pm
riskier for us, let's end it now, at least until we get closer to the deadline, and then maybe another, big, long shutdown. host: julie, your thoughts on that question? >> i agree with bob. i think there's a difference between a weekend shutdown where you had fairly minimal impact and a weekday shutdown. that's what we were starting to see today. federal workers with a lot of uncertainty, a lot of impact being predicted about the actual work they'd be doing and i think schumer and particularly those democrats were on the ballot in november in red states decided it just wasn't worth that fight. host: julie pace, washington bureau chief for the associated press. thanks for being with us. >> thanks for having me. hip back with bob cusack. we remember where schumer was in 2013.
7:21 pm
guest: it was something speaker baronner and mitch mcconnell didn't want to follow, it led plups, tdown, blamed on ted cruz was a big part of that. he is still standing behind that today. host: here's what he said today. >> i'm glad we got a minute to open up again, it was a mistake for chuck schumer to shut down the government three days of the schumer shuttown. the reason chuck schumer forced a shutdown is his far left base is enraged. they're angry. they hate the president. and their demanding a senate -- demanding senate democrats oppose everything, resist everything and shut everything down. >> sounds familiar, didn't you
7:22 pm
say all this back when it happened to you? >> i realize that's the media narrative you love to tell. it's worth noting in 2013 -- >> green eggs and ham. >> i vote red petedly to fund the government. it was harry reid and the democrats who voted no, who vote odd to shut the government down. just like this week. republicans voted to fund the government and chuck schumer and the diems voted to shut it down. >> bottom line, are shutdowns a good use of leverage or not? >> look we should not be shutting the government down. i have consistently opposed shutdowns. in 2013 i said we shouldn't shut the government down. indeed, i went to the senate floor repeatedly asking unanimous consent to reopen the government. >> you stood in the way of that. >> that's factually incorrect. >> it's not though. >> it's a wonderful media narrative. only one thing actually causes a shutdown. when you have senators who vote to deny cloture on a funding
7:23 pm
bill. when that bill comes up and a yes means fund the government a no means don't fund the government. in 2013, virtually every single republican voted to fund the government including me, multiple times. and virtually every -- in fact, i believe every single democrat voted to shut the government down. the same is true here. virtually every single republican voted this week to fund the government. virtually every single democrat voted to shut it down. >> that's not the case. >> which of those facts are incorrect? >> you insisted at that time -- >> i get that you want to debate me but you done have any facts. host: your reaction to that exchange? guest: i think you're going to see more of those type of exchanges. shutdowns are remembered. this one will be remembered. not as much as the last one because it was only a three-day shutdown, basically 2 1/2 days. ted cruz has political aspirations. he's up for re-election in 2018. democrats would love to take him out. i think it's an uphill climb.
7:24 pm
i think he's going to be running for president and this came up when he ran for president that certainly the polls showed that republicans lost that shutdown battle. host: for those listening on c-span radio, we're talking with bob cusack, editor in chief of "the hill" newspaper. trying to sort through the day's events. this statement from the white house, i'm pleased democrats in congress have come to their senses. once the government is funded my administration will work toward solving the problem of very unfair illegal immigration. we'll make a long-term deal on immigration if and only if it is good for the country. guest: that's both senator mcconditional and senator schumer have been critical of the president, schumer said over the weekend negotiating with trump is like negotiating with jell he. mitch mcconnell said we need to figure out what the president stands for on this we've heard different things from the administration at different times. what's going to happen, the administration will have to spell out what they want clearly.
7:25 pm
host: more reaction from house members. we pointed out that congressman steve scalise is back on capitol hill. he underwent surgery? guest: yes. this is multiple surgeries now. he said this was a plan he has made a remarkable recovery, his deputy, patrick mchenry, but key to whipping the house vote when they passed their budget bill, but scalise is now back. host: here's what the republican whip told reporters earlier. >> glad to be back. obviously a lot is going on here. want to come back to hopefully see us reopen the government. make sure we can pay our troops. i know it's been an interesting last few days. i've been staying in touch with the rest of the leadership team and my staff. glad i was able to make it back for this part of finishing up this important work. >> without getting into the politics, left and right here,
7:26 pm
did this surprise you that it got to this point? >> it surprised me a little bit because the house got together to pass a clean c.a. and add the chip bill which had widespread support. this was a bill that ebb sured that for years we'll be able to fund the children's health insurance program which in many states was getting ready to run out of money. so to see democrats who in the kinds ed to praise those of bill voting en masse against it didn't make sense. i think the country didn't agree with the package that chuck -- with the tactics chuck schumer and the democrats were using. i'm glad they realized it was time to come to their senses nd get this bill passed.
7:27 pm
>> we've had a working group but we have been clear any final solution has to include funding for the wall. we've been working closely with president trump on that i'm glad to see chuck schumer agreed that the wall ought to be funded. but also we -- we wanted to make sure that amnesty was not part of what we did. now ultimately we've got to see how all sides can come together, see if the senate can come together that president trump can support. i think there's a deal to be made but in my mind it would not include amnesty and it has to include real border security and funding of the wall. host: congressman steve scalise, house republican whip. first of all, your reaction to what you heard from him? guest: no one is pro-amnesty and no one is pro-government shutdown. but what defines amnesty is a big question going forward.
7:28 pm
that's going to be a problem for steve scalise. any deal they strike, i think a deal could come out of the senate but how do you bring it to the house floor when probably whatever deal to get -- whatever deal gets out of the senate if they get one out of the senate, how do you get the majority of the majority which house republicans insist on? i think there's going to be the biggest test for house leadership, including steve scalise in the coming weeks. host: so it could pass the senate and then die in the house? guest: it could. we're seeing more talk on bipartisan immigration pr posals, including one from senator graham and senator durbin than in the house. host: explain the march 5 deadline for daca? julia: that's when the six months runs out. that's -- guest: that's when the six onths run out. i think there could be lee way
7:29 pm
in that debate, it fends on what the enforcement of these dreamers who came here illegally but people say shoushed stale but also remember democrats are pointing out that people are losing their status before march 5. so that's why the left is so upset that they don't have anything and can't wait another day to get the deal. host: we're joined by congressman mike kelly of pennsylvania. it's been a busy couple of day, thank you for being here with us. mr. kelly: thank you. host: if a bill passes the enate, what's the chances it passes the house? mr. kelly: it depends on what's in the bill. 24 can't be a small number of people saying we have a solution. since i've been here, this is my eighth yearing we've had people working on immigration
7:30 pm
reform but it's so corm kated. then you get into, i can accept this but not that. i think we just talked about how do you define amnesty and where does amnesty fit in? that's really a question for a lot of us that may be a sticking point. host: in terms of those here now, there are different figures. 700,000, maybe as many as 1.5 million. is there any sense that we could see any mass deportation? or will there be a compromise to keep those dreamers here in the u.s.? mr. kelly: i think the difference between the president when he was running as the candidate and then we he became president he's change latele bit his view of the daca folks. i think the key is the enforcement. you enen-- what do you enforce? when do you enforce? how stringent is the enforcement? there are a lot of us who understand that in some cases these are very young people. but they are here illegally. you have to look at what makes sense. i do believe we have a
7:31 pm
president that has a very open mind and a person who looks at this and says let's make sure we're doing the right thing for the right reasons. this daca issue is the big issue but right now they are here illegally. i wish president obama had not done an end run, made an executive decision to do this without the congress. i think president trump is clear, this is the responsibility of the congress i want to see a fix come out of the congress he set the date of march 5. that's what we're working oward now. guest: congressman kelly, how do you fix this so we don't go from one deadline to another, could you envision a two-year budget down the road? mr. kelly: i think that makes the most sense of anything. i'm from the private sector. i don't know how people work on two and three-week budgets and try to figure there's a good end to this. the certainty of what it is you have to work with is critical
7:32 pm
anybody running any kind of business. you have to have those things in place. the idea that we don't have to do it to me is completely foreign. i have no idea how we got to this point. i would love to see a two-year budget you can look at, know where you're going, there's a clear path of what it is we have to defend and more importantly the appropriations process takes place that committee has the ability and has the responsibility to make sure that the 12 premises bills are done and we send them to the senate for their approval. we did that last year. unfortunately, the senate did not pick up on them. i think if you're an appropriator, you start to wonder, we did all this work, why doesn't it go forward? that's a process, i wouldn't begin to criticize the senate, i wouldn't want to be in the senate, i love being in the house where things happen much more quickly. host: let me turn to bob cusack. guest: hey, congressman, i want to get your take, whatever deal is struck eventually, whether
7:33 pm
it's before the next deadline or not that it will be a dreamer deal and with some border security, maybe some wall funding but number one do you think it's essential that any type of deal looic that will get a majority of the majority in the house and do you think that speaker ryan should commit to that publicly? mr. kelly: i think the president is clear. he wants to make a long-term deal on immigration. but he wants to make sure it's realy good for our country. i don't think that's odd that the president of the united states would say, i'm open to these things as long as it's in the best interest of the american people and our great country. whether speaker ryan or whomever it is that works on this, and the speaker is working all these things, he's done a magnificent job navigating the last couple of days here. look, we're going to have to come up with immigration reform, no question about that. how we get there, the details of it, right now up in the air. i would love to be able to sit in on that, i will have that opportunity but it's a very
7:34 pm
complicated issue. as you know. and for anybody to say this is exactly the way it's going to be is -- that is something, you set parameters and think, this is the sticking point. these are the main point we was to achieve. border security for most is what the president talked about in his campaign. that's why the american people elected him. so he's saying very clearly, we get that border wall, get that border wall up, we protect the issues and the people of the united states, that's our main job. that's -- we take an issue, an oath to defend. and so i'm strong on doing that. the american people come first. then whatever comes after that, i'm fine, as long as it, again, fits within the grand scheme of what it is we're trying to get done. host: congressman kelly, one final point, i'm sure you saw this story, the pennsylvania supreme court ruling on congressional maps, i'm not sure it will affect the third congressional district but state lawmakers need to redraw maps in pell before this fall's elections. what are your thoughts?
7:35 pm
mr. kelly: we'll have something coming out very soon. our delegation did meet. there'll be a statement coming out from all of us in regards to that. host: congressman mike kelly, republican of president, joining us on the phone, thank you for being with us. "the hill" is reporting by the decision on the state of pennsylvania, what impact do you think it's going to have? guest: i'm not sure what the next step would be. we have a pending case on redistricting at the supreme court. we have north carolina also had a recent ruling. so the big question is, when i go outside the beltway, there's talk to talk, when you average joe, they like the idea of term limits. president trump embraced that. there's also some frustration at the gerrymandering that's gone on on both the democrat and republican sides. the question is, and i think this is just going to be decided by the courts, is this fair? is this the american way, that you have these gerrymanders
7:36 pm
districts that sometimes look like a pretzel to fit lawmaker's attempts to stay in office to have friendly voters, whether it's votes on the right or the left. host: we've been talking about the budget process, let me go back to what we chatted with congressman mike kelly in terms of fixing this long-term, not necessarily for this year but down the road. does the congress have the ap site and will power to do that? guest: i'm skeptical. you talked about a two-year budget deal which has attracted bipartisan support in the past but hasn't gotten enough support to be pushed over the finish line. there's real exhaustion on capitol hill on appropriators that the house appropriators are passing bill the senate can't take them up then you get this kind of mass fiscal showdown at the end. it seems like it's deja vu all over again. i think there's frustration but will that frustration lead to changes in the process? there are critics of the two-year budget idea. i don't see it happening any
7:37 pm
time soon. this hoich this clearly will be an issue that plays out in the 2018 campaign. not the budget process but the immigration issue. guest: mid-terms are usually about getting their base outism in deal on immigration is going to at least upset parts of both of those bases without a doubt. the house is definitely in play. the senate, republicans have a friendly map where democrats are defending a lot of seats in trump country. but there's even a chance that democrats could win back the senate. but the house is where most political handicappers are kind of deciding. we've got a long way off. i don't think the individual shutdown will play any type of role in the election unless they're recurrent and they're happening again and again because they can't get a deal on immigration. host: one final point, the issue of trust. it came up at today's white house briefing, sarah sanders wased asked about that between
7:38 pm
republicans and kems. let's listen and get your reaction. >> bring republicans down here, bring the republicans here, hash it out, how is this going to be different, didn't see him move over the weekend, he was only talking to republicans. obviously if there's going to be a deal by february 8, it eeds to involve democrats. sarah: we've been clear about what we want do see in any legislation, i don't think there's a lot of daylight between where we are and where the democrats are. we want to goshte and get to a place and we're hopeful we can do that over the next couple of weeks. host: from today's white house briefing with sarah huckabee sanders. joining us on the phone is the principal deputy white house press secretary, thank you for being with us. you with us? >> i am. thanks for having me on. host: let me ask you first about the president's involvement. a lot of questions at today's briefing. we didn't see him, we saw some
7:39 pm
pictures, but what was he doing over the last three days in the shutdown? >> he was engaged on two fronts. he was making sure that government, while being shut down, was not going to have a huge impact. so other the weekend he dealt with the o.m.b. director, mick mulvaney, to make sure the impact of the shutdown would be minimal on paychecks, we could keep national parks over, provide basic services. mick mulvaney went through a lot of this over the weekend. then he was talking to house an senate republicans. that's leader mccarthy and paul ryan in the house, senator mcconnell and cornyn in the senate. his message was pretty clear that, you know, the offer that had been made to senate democrats was a very reasonable one. that you know, having a continuing resolution for several weeks that included chip funding, that included,
7:40 pm
you know, the delay of tacks on a bipartisan basis deserved support and he was to not give essentially and say we're going to reopen negotiations on immigration before we reopen the government. so having that firm line and giving political support to the republicans on the hill was a key part of what the president was doing over the weekend, making sure that we were going to hold the line. we were going to essentially take a firm position, understand that, you know, senate democrats would try to wiggle their way out of this but they need to open the government with another before we'd restart negotiations. >> let me go back to the earlier question. is there a level of trust between senator durbin, senator schumer and the president? >> i don't think there's a great level of trust with senator schumer, he had a conversation with the president in the oval office on friday afternoon. or mid morning, i think.
7:41 pm
and then walked out and proceeded to mischaracterize the details of that conversation, making claims about offering and deals that were not accurate. and you know, that doesn't help the situation. but he is also the senate minority leader. we will work with him to keep the government open. i will be candid, i don't think that the events of the last 7 hers helped senator schumer's cause of being an honest broker and dealmaker with the white house. host: we're talking to principal deputy press secretary of white house. bob cusack is here. guest: i want to ask you a question, over the last 72 hours, luis gutierrez said he's open to a wall even though he doesn't like it, he would exchange dreamers for the wall. senator schumer said he's put that on the table. do you think that -- and that was not the case weeks and
7:42 pm
months ago. do you think the chances of the wall getting approved with funding are rising significantly this year? >> we do think so. we think these democrats now nderstand that when we had a meeting two weeks ago in the cabinet room where a bipartisan group said we're going to talk about four issues, it wasn't just daca, but border security and the wall, ending the visa lottery and reforms to the extended family chain migration system. those are necessary when you look at daca, right. because the issue is that if u are sympathetic, and the president duds want to find a responsible solution, but if you give them legal status, you encourage more parents to come over a po rouse board we are minors. we don't want a situation three, five, 10 years from now where hundreds of thousands of
7:43 pm
illegal immigrants have been brought here that we now have to try to give more legal protections to. so by not securing the border, but not providing reforms to chain migration and ending the visa lottery systeming we're going to run into that problem again. so the president wants to fix it. i think the democrats understand now that the president is serious when he says he wants to fix the problems and not kick the can down the road solution. and hopefully we can come together and, you know, and come to some sort of solution. i will say the remarks by congressman gutierrez and some of the things said by senator schumer he claim head said in the oval office are helpful and i think are a big piece of the border security. host: let me take that one step further then. if the democrats agree to funding for the wall and we heard the figure $18 billion, gidley said ogan
7:44 pm
the administration is asking for, if that's there, could you see them agreeing to a path to citizenship to keep dreamers in the u.s. without repercussions? >> those are two, significant, very important pieces to the puzzle. i do think right now that our view is two other issues, ending the visa lottery system, which i think there's bipartisan backing for and democrats voted to end it 20 13, and also some reforms looking at the extended family chain migration system and moving us more toward a merit-based system. those are our priorities in this negotiation. you know, i'm sure there might be some flexibility on some of the terms. probably some on the democrat side as well. but i think you have the contours of a deal. host: one final point, the president was scheduled to leave for davos, switzerland, on wednesday, what's the status of the trip? >> i think it's more likely than not now that the shutdown
7:45 pm
vote happened in the senate but i don't have any announcements right now. we hope to make that trip happen. host: raj shah, the principal deputy press secretary. thank you for joining us. bob cusack, final thoughts? guest: stay tuned. this is going to be an intense battle. the bottom line is you've seen one shut coun in 2018 you may see at least one more. host: really? guest: yeah, i think. and the next one could be the big one. this was just a fight over a timeline basically and some other things attached to the bill the next one is the actual heavy lifting. host: bob cusack, editor in chief of "the hill" newspaper, his work and that of his colleagues is at thank you for being with us. you're listening and watching c-span's "washington today." >> where are you from? go ahead. >> the moment itself, i described at the time and still
7:46 pm
describe it as a bizarre moment. i was surprised when he called me other but he's the president of the united states and you're in the oval office so if he says who are you, come over ere, you sort of go with it. >> irish journalist katrina perry talks about covering president trump and his supporters for the irish media during and after the 2016 presidential election season. in her book "in america." >> drain the swamp, three words is incredibly evocative and it does what it says on the tin. immediately coined of what it's talking about, i see playing on the notion that d.c. was built on a swamp. by training it, taking out these horrible people that live there and replacing it with better people. that was something, whether voters believed him or not, or believed he could fulfill that are o-- that or not, they were prepared to take a chance on
7:47 pm
it. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." host: welcome back to "washington today." on wall street, markets reacting to the news on today's deal reopening the government. dow moving ahead 143 points. nasdaq up 72. the s&p up 22 1/2. some other headlines, mass i firestorms which ept -- which swept through california's wine country last october have state legislators considering a major overhaul to emergency ealert measures. the goal is to deliver more timely alert warnings, reaching not just television and radio station bus also smart phones and other digital devices. the fires hitting four northern california counties, claiming 44 lives. and montana's democratic governor signed an executive order that requires all internet service provide wers state contracts to abide by net neutrality principles. today's order by governor steve bullock makes his first -- his state the first one to push back on the decision to repeal
7:48 pm
open internet rules from last month. c-span's "the communicators" looks at this issue, it airs every saturday 6:30 p.m. eastern time on c-span and any time at more from the senate today and the c.r. that will keep the government in operation through february 8. here is the chair of the senate intelligence committee, richard burr of north carolina, on the intelligence provisions in that c.r. >> i was note ed when the house c.r. appeared that there was language in it that was different than in the past. and the language is in section 148 of the c.r. it's of concern to the intelligence committee. let me read the language. section 148, funds appropriated by the department of defense missile defense and defense enhancement acts, appropriation
7:49 pm
acts of 2018, division b of ublic law 115-96, may be obligated and expended without -- notwithstanding section 504 of the national security act of 1947. now the language is troublesome for the committee because it would authorize the intelligence community to spend funds not withstanding the law that requires prior authorization by the senate intelligence committee or by the house intelligence committee. now, the vice chairman and i were on the floor, i think, 65-34 ek, and we had a vote to re-authorize the most significant intelligence tool to keep america safe. and in that debate, both senator warner and myself said we would osition that
7:50 pm
do everything within the committee's power to make sure that we did a i aggressive, realtime oversight over the entire intelligence community. host: from the senate floor earlier today, senator richard burr part of the debate that did not get a lot of attention, but an important provision, intelligence provisions in the c.r. the vice chair and ranking democrat of the senate intelligence committee is virginia senator mark warner. >> being on the intelligence committee at least until recently has not been necessarily all that high attention and profile. we spend hundreds and hundreds of hours every month in a skiff. and one of the things that is -- that i find so rewarding about the intelligence community's work is on issue after issue, you couldn't tell who is a democrat and who is a republican. we all take extraordinarily serious our oversight responsibilities. if this exemption is granted, you could p ten rblely have an
7:51 pm
administration, any administration, go off and take on covert activities, for ample, with no ability for our committee which spends the time and as the oversight to say time out, or we disagree with that policy. so i've been very disturbed about the whole process that arose in the house, how this attempted to get slipped in i hope as well as the chairman that no member would choose to object and if they do choose to object, i hope they'll be able to explain to the american public why they'd want to remove the intelligence committees -- committee's ability to monitor and then if we make a decision withdraw funds if we don't agree and have that ongoing tool that's one of the most keykey components of our oversight committee woy why they would want in effect to give any
7:52 pm
administration a blank check my hope would be that no one will object to this request, that we will continue the policy that existed for as long as i've been on the committee and those of us on the committee will continue to take the responsibility of oversight very, very seriously and continue to do it in a bipartisan way. host: that's from discussion on the senate floor, mark warner. the house tonight and the senate earlier today moving ahead on a bill to reopen the government officially tonight and tomorrow. the senate vote was 81-18. how did we get to this point, which is a question often asked by reporters on capitol hill, including casey hunt on nbc news to democratic senator chris coons of delaware. >> how did this happen? >> i want to give a lot of credit to a bipartisan working group of more than 20 senators that steadily built over the last 48 hours who listened to
7:53 pm
each other, respected each other and talked not just about how to get an agreement to reopen the government but how to get a pathway toward resolving some of our most dysfunctional aspects of the senate, how to get an appropriations process moving again, how to get a negotiation that could actually hold out hope of fully funding our defense and domestic needs, addressing disaster relief and addressing opioids, addressing community health centers. we have a big menu of things not yet resolved. >> do you trust mitch mcconnell to follow through? >> leader mcconnell made a clear, public commitment on the floor of the senate. we can't move forward if we dent trust each other. i'm going to trust that leader mcconnell will move forward by a date stern and that we have a group that will work together and build a bipartisan con sense us is that provides a product worthy of time on the floor. ost: another senator puts it
7:54 pm
this week, -- another reporter ts it this way, senate democrats agree to a c.r. quickly denounced by activists. a bipartisan group of negotiators in the senate prevailed with leadership, trading democrat edge support for reopening the government for a commitment by republicans to hold a vote resolving the status of young, undocumented imgrants by mid february. senator jeff flake is a republican from arizona. he is step do you think after one term this year. he was also asked questions by nbc's casey hunt. >> how did this happen? >> what, the -- >> the deal. how did we get here? >> three days of -- of talking, i guess. basically, friday, what we started with was a -- basically what we ended with but just a firmer commitment than we had initially. >> did you promise to hold
7:55 pm
mcconnell's feet to the fire on this? >> we did talk to democrats and said we feel we have a commitment and i did go back to the leader's office and said that stronger language would be helpful and he did give stronger language on the floor today, particularly about the fair thovepbs process. in terms of picking a bill or how the to proceed with work. that was convincing to the democrats. >> do you trust mitch mcconnell? >> i do think a commitment made like this today with such fanfare for what will happen three weeks from now, i think we can couldn't on it. >> does this mean compromise is back and possible in washington? >> i hope. so we had these meetings in susan collins' office, a greing -- a fwring number of people. >> compromise is cool again? >> it will be nice to have a proprocess on the senate floor we haven't seen far listening
7:56 pm
time, really since the bipartisan immigration bill we did before where we went through regular order and dealt with amendments an everybody had their say. this will be much like that. host: senator jeff flake, republican of arizona. the other story we mentioned at the top of the program, vice president mike pence in israel. this headline from "the wall street journal." the vice president saying the u.s. will open an embassy in jerusalem next year. he also signaled support for the resumption of peace talks with the palestinians. here's the vice president. >> 70 years ago the united states was proud to be the first nation in the world to recognize the state of israel. but as you well know, the work we began on that day was left unfinished. for while the united states recognized your nation, one administration after another refused to recognize your capital. but just last month, president donald trump made history. he righted a 70-year wrong, he
7:57 pm
kept his word to the american people when he announced that the united states of america will finally acknowledge jerusalem is israel's capital. [applause] the jewish people's unbreakable bond to this sacred city reaches back more than 3,000 years. it was here in jerusalem on mount mariah that abraham offered his son, isaac and was credited with righteousness for his faith in god. he was here in jerusalem that king david consecrated the capital of the kingdom of israel. and since its rebirth, the modern state of israel has called this city the seat of its government. jerusalem is israel's capital. and as such, president trump has directed the state department to immediately begin
7:58 pm
preparations to move the united states embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem. [applause] host: vice president mike pence in israel earlier today. finally, on this day in history, january 22, 1973. cbs evening news anchor walter cronkite reporting on the death of our 36th president, lyndon baines johnson. >> president johnson, the 36th president of the united states, who served from the time of president kennedy's ssassination in 1963 until 1969, when president nixon succeeded him, has died. he died of a heart attack. he had been suffering from heart ailments for some time. he had two serious previous
7:59 pm
heart attacks, one as recently as a couple of months ago. he'd been back at his ranch, though, and seemed to be in reasonably good health in recent weeks. he had been up and around. he had not been bedridden in any way and he was stricken this afternoon at 3:40 this afternoon , he died shortly thaffer, apparently derek spite the best efforts of three secret servicemen at the scene who gai him every emergency aid they could. host: january 22, 1973, the death of president lyndon johnson is announced by walter cronkite. we're back tomorrow morning, a live simulcast of c-span's "washington journal" here on c-span radio. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on