tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN July 9, 2016 2:00am-4:01am EDT
>> i believe that is correct. i understand there is a good argument for the opsis point of view -- opposite but i believe this. >> mr. lazarus, would you agree with the other assessments? >> i would not only agree but agree the constant den of charges coming from the president's political opponents that he is overreaching and violating laws is a distortion of the truth. prior to king burwell, we heard the same litany, the tax credits
in federal change was a violation of the law and the supreme court didn't agree with that. but we are larrying it over and over again. it turns out it was a good program, i can personally testify to that, when it was implemented there were delays because it is very complicated in implementing these complicated laws. they said it was quote wise unquote to do this. i think these charges of overreach reflect the reflection
of this administration demonizing the act. >> it is reason to believe the executive branch acted appropriately in executing the law. my republican colleagues have been examining this for two years. today's hearing is the filing of a lawsuit questioning the constituti constituti constitution constitutionality of the program. it follows interviews with 13 current and government officials from four federal agencies. my question is congress has a wealth of tools.
have they used their legislative authority to review this. >> i think the fact that congress republicans have taken no such steps to pass such legislation is an eloquent testimony to the fact they are failing to use those weapons and running to court as a diversion tactic. >> i would state enough is enough. after 64 votes on the floor, dozens of hearing, and countless letters to the administration, it is clear that there is no purpose to this aimless oversight. i call on my republican colleagues to move on to other important topics that deserve our time and attention and
respond appropriately to the general public we serve. with that i yield back. >> now i recognize mr. mullin for five minutes. >> the identity of the source only changes at the report, right? >> i believe so. >> mr. miller, would you mind explaining that a little more? >> they filled information that confirmed this would be subject to sequestration and reversed direction on that. it was because it wasn't a mandatory appropriation beyond that year and that would have reduced the cost sharing reduction payment. >> the insurer gets 92.8 cents
on the dollar? i think the position we are trying to take is the timing can't be -- the timing seemed a little coincidental. thank you. the oklahoma accent wouldn't allow me to pit it out. the justification behind this i have a hard time believing this. mr. lazarus, i appreciate your opinion on this but it sounds like you are trying to justify the actions. all we are trying to do is not keep poking the eye in this administration even though we do that quite often. but who is hurting? the insurers. the people this is supposed to protect.
the exchanges in oklahoma went up 49% alone this year. the same people we were supposed to take by the law it is hurting. don't take our word for it. go out and see how much insurance is costing today versus 2010. in six years. something is wrong here and that is what we are trying to do; fix it. we all have constituents. we don't want anyone out there without insurance but there is and the cost is rising. why? it is costing the taxpayers and dollars. we are holding the bucket full of dollars, i guess. but this is one piece of it. mr. lazarus, i am not trying to come after you on this but i am just disappointed in hearing you justify the administration's actions and think it is
political for some reason. it is not political. mr. miller, would you like to respond more to what mr. lazarus is saying? >> i could chose a lot of territory. let me raise one that hasn't been talked about. the argument of having it both ways. there was argument in the alternative in court. we have heard people are going to be suffering because they won't be getting any cost-sharing reduction subsidies. even if that was the case, they are trying to have it both ways and say the insurance will just raise the premiums and the tax credits will be larger and covered anyway. it is one of these migrating arguments where no matter what you do you end up in the same place. >> mr. rosenberg, you are congressional expert and literally wrote the book on this. i know you have been asked what we could do, i think your response was pass legislation.
we tried that. it doesn't work. what else can we do in congress to up hold this administration countable to keep things we feel are outside of the boundaries. everyone says we control the purse strings. in your opinion as the expert what is our next step? >> he thaz to shore up your abilities to know what is going on. to know how decisions are made, who makes them. it has been clear the doors have been closed on you.
the slow walking -- >> deliberately slow walking. >> and absolutely refusilrefusi. when subpoenas are issued they are ignored. when you try to go to do what traditionally has been done like a criminal contempt to show you mean what you are saying, it is now impossible to do. dwi court for a single action. that puts everything on hold and we know that it takes up time and time is a necessity.
>> thank you. the gentlemen's time expired. >> thank you, mr. chairman, for allowing him to explain that. >> thank you very much. ms. schakowsky you are recognized for five minutes. >> i really apologize for missing. there were all of these confl t conflicting things but i appreciate you being here and have a couple questions for mr. lazarus. yesterday the ways and means committee held a hearing on cost sharing reductions in front of the members of the hhs and a member of the committee declared this isn't about poor people but an insurance subsidy unquote. i think this is not genuine. the cost sharing reductions are a benefit to consumers that flee through the insurance company.
the average consumer benefiting receives approximately $500 a year and suggesting that it is an insurance subsidy is cynical and distracts people from the reality that house republicans are trying to take hillary clinton -- health care benefits away. >> will the gentlelady yield? >> no. this tells us what we need to know about the republican's priorities. this isn't a good faith investigation to make sure constituents receive quality health care. ...
>> >> this law was passed to make people not insurance companies but the affordable care act has provided 20 million americans with political health insurance and offered millions more protections against discrimination against preexisting conditions a gen gender of the approximate 11.1 million consumers who have effectuated a moment 57% or 6.4 million individuals were benefiting
to make coverage more affordable what is the text of a loss of just of congress intent with the affordable care act was passed? the way it has administered those consistent with their broader reform to the insurance marketplace. >> yes. in brief the cost sharing subsidies are the essential component to the other mechanisms that the affordable care act to employees is to further the goal to get as close as possible to universal insurance and the statute is replete with a specific component of the plan that is necessary to achieve and
it is replete with specific references to the importance of the cost sharing reductions to achieving those purposes. >> does it only takes us further from that goal and it is read disrespectful to the american people of the coverage provided in the law but over the years the passage of the affordable care act we have attempted to sit down with the republicans to come up with the kind of fixes that on a bipartisan basis and there's so many times we felt give
is the name of the constituent and we will take care of it thank untried to make it work. we need to be serious about working together to making it the great lawn that it could be. >> mr. chairman i am hearing a lot of passion on the democrats on the other side by we're holding a partisan hearing. we have three grandchildren with the fourth of the way while i am here. it is about our children and grandchildren ndf every dollar deficit space after we pay end earn a living within our means?
every time i cast a vote no matter what finding it is the solution is the same barrault more money that my children and grandchildren have to pay back to be disrespectful that is disrespectful of we cannot pay our way now is fundamentally immoral. talk about eight and switching and false advertising american here is a great plan and here is what it will cost billions of not trillions so when we get into a hearing like this when the administration has an appropriately put $7 billion remind the democrats were that could go that could fully fund. [inaudible]
n fix all the bridges out $1 billion per bridge that would fully fund zika 5,000 bridges in america that is why this hearing matters so here is a rhetorical question if the $7 billion did not flow into the insurance companies of the constitutional authority what would have happened to the premiums across the hca? >> there are a lot of moving parts of the front and then to provide the subsidies but we have a lot of moving parts. >> because this tsr is part of a california they would
have to continue then you could argue one way or another the premiums go up than the government, the broader audience are is by making congress responsible as it should be deciding how to sort that out. we don't know how congress may decide. >> with those costs the pressure is we may decide to prioritize our children's future for our grandchildren's future or. [inaudible] funding or infrastructure repair but this administration of what we've would say is an unconstitutional overreach and the president said the selfie calls anybody but teacher uses the pen all the time that this is absolutely proper and to bring up another point there is
something called the anti-a deficiency act congress cancer cell in individual who misappropriates government funding without the appropriation request it has to be individual in this administration continues to refuse to put anyone's name on the line that was involved in illegal decisionmaking and i would just ask if that is the improper interpretation if we don't have a name we cannot sue that misappropriated money? >> wright begins to have to have been accountable officials in there is a mysterious effort. >> we did get names we will hold hearings but that is the little nuances that matters i believe they matter quite a lot but i will go back to say this is about my children and
grandchildren ted respecting the taxpayers we respect the taxpayers of united states of america for the future generations robbed of the opportunity to live the american dream that will be so saddled with debt the debate we see in venezuela and greece and p.r. >> thanks to the panel for joining us today to tell the truth to offset some of those claims we have heard how great the affordable care act has been the architect has said publicly that if they could flip a full americans into this they would eventually like it but they still don't they were promised they could keep their doctor and that turned out to be like even their insurance plan indigos
lawn and on i want to remind everybody what the constitution says that, i will come back to that but one of the claims is that this was of frivolous lawsuit the courts have upheld this so just so we have a clearer context article one says no money should be drawn for the treasury does is say if it is deemed to be that way so my question is we have had an unprecedented levels of obstruction from this administration and this indicates they have nothing to hide if they didn't then
send us all the documents we ask for a wouldn't tamper with the witnesses and let them answer the question. if they didn't have anything to hide they would do that. but nonetheless we have learned a lot about the administration's decision from this program and we will continue to present those facts as congress carries out the executive branch cop as part of checks and balances they think that this is unacceptable there had been executive claims its penetration is trying to claim privilege of confidentiality claims are you aware of any such
privilege the executive branch has? >> the administration is clearly obstructing the investigation do you agree that the administration is clearly obstructing congress to pursue this matter? >> yes. from what i have been reading and what i now. >> the direction he was headed is what could congress be doing to ensure it has the access for oversight to help congress pass legislation? what additional steps to we need to take? >> shore up your ability to enforce your subpoena and there are two ways. traditionally you had a criminal contempt process
but the administration has come out that has said we can block that we don't have to go to court to do it in you can't because it is unconstitutional and it interferes with those prerogatives you used to have and still have another course of the inherent content to bring a a recalcitrant officer to hold him in contempt and even in jail at that particular point that seems an unseemly in also unconstitutional what you'd do to make that process? domain that appeared
draconian the you go out and arrest and detain to put them in jail for it what you want is to get information and have leverage to do it to have the judicatory proceeding of what is it dash and determined with a trial before a the house and as a result in not imprisonment but a fine that goes against the salary of a particular person. and if up held through the challenges, a finding of
contempt would trigger a point of order and that brings attention. >> thank you. >> we're out of time. could you be so kind to submit other recommendations? and remind members they have 10 business-- suit -- to submit for the record. >> i really don't question the motives of the majority that is the congressional prerogatives if congress believes they have overstepped their constitutional bounds but i do think based on what was
said today there may be an honest disagreement. >> will yield? >> no i want. and also to implement but be that as it may, i feel what the democrats are trying to say today is even if there is the general disagreement on the constitutional authority this problem could be easily resolved by congress by passing legislation to clarify. >> mr. chairman? >> can i have order? >> if this fund is struck down by the court then 6.4 million people will lose their subsidy.
>> that is not true. >> mr. chairman. >> the results is that we hope that there has been no effort to fix this and their respective of what happens in a court, we need to work together to make sure they can get affordable health care. >> i will say that i disagree and i asked members to read the jury to investigative report and the source of funding that outlined in this event this committee is dedicated to find some solutions for health care you're not abandoning those in the third is a constitutional question and all the we fundamentally degree with what mr. lazarus says meet half to pull together and find solutions normally
those who are low income compared to health care but simply declaring because i can make it so as not a constitutional issue and we will uphold that if other members have questions please give those to us. >> we do have documents that might make this easier. >> we now enter when dash adjourn. [inaudible conversations]
>> as some of you heard me say, some guest my have to depart earlier. chairman walden is here, and rob simms. this is chairman walden's fourth visit and thank you for coming back and bringing mr. simms with you. >> i will talk about representative walden's family coming by wagon train in 1845 in order to get as many questions. that is it for the biographical portion and now to the ground rules.
we are on the record, no live bloging, tweeting, no filing of any kind while the breck breakfast is underway to give us time to listen to the guest. it is likely we will beending well before the 9:30 usual stop time. to help you resist the selfie urge we will e-mail pictures to the reporters after the breakfast. if you would like to ask a question do the traditional thing and send a subtle, non-threatening signal and i will call on one and all in the time we have available. we will start with letting the guests make opening comments and set the stage and go to questions after that. thank you for coming. appreciate it. what i should say on a tragic morning with a number of colleagues not here because of the events in dallas. >> thank you, david. it is an honor and privilege to be back with you, many who i see on the hill and in the speakers cloak room. thank you for letting me share a
few comments and take your questions. i want to start with hoping we are keeping in your prayers. i pray we can come together as a country and address the issues of the violence effectively. i want to clarify one thing david said, he said my family came by wagon train and i want to point out it was my ancestors that came in 1845. not my own family. this is an interesting election here and i would like to set the stage by going backwards a couple cycles and then take it today. if you go back to the 2010 election it was a wave year and referendum on a president and a party that had total, complete control cluing 60 votes in the senate at one point.
the american people thought there was no check and balance, no break on the system, that we are traditionally acustomed to. up rose this ground swell of grassroots support to make a difference and change and stop things in washington from the run away train they were on. that produced the biggest republican majority in the house since world war ii. in the 2012 cycle, you had kind of a balancing out because you had, not a referendum only taking place in the house election, but a presidential election cycle as well. the senate wasn't gain by the publ public. we had a good freshman class from 2010 and redistricting took place due to the enormous numbers across the country.
if not all of the members elected in 2014, earned their way into the their seats, you will see there was a bump at the end but most of us knew every game unlike 2010 when names came up and said who is that? they never stopped doing their work. we knew coming into the 2016 ele electo electorial cycle it would be different. we knew it would be different than '14. we understand that now and did then and we are a data driven organization.
we have terrific recruits coming forward and open seats and challenge seat opportunities, literally from one end the count country to another. our members have done good jobs legislatively. if you look at katko in new york he has passed 11 bills and two signed into law. my favorite headline fighting until 5 a.m. to save fort drum. when you see these legislatures coming to washington to get things done and fix a broken system and they have a lot to go home and talk about because they are doing it every day. they are working hard and running effective campaigns.
finally, when we look at the presidential playing field, as you know, mr. trump was before our conference yesterday, acally which it was cordual and positive and i think many members had the opportunity to hear directly from mr. trump for the first time and vice versa. there was kidding and jostling back and forth and people left our conference feeling better about the nominee. there is a narrative coming from the dccc that all we have to do is boost the race to be over. we see no data and efrd to indu k indicate
such. i have faith in the american people and their ability to tell the difference between one person and another. if you are out doing the work the voters know you and what you are about. they will have a decision on who is best able to represent them locally. finally when we read the 70-80 seats are going to be in play it is a head scratcher to figure out where the data is staying from. so, we feel good about where we have at. we know we have competitive races we have to run. we think we are well equipped financially.
best finances we have had and on the data digital, strategic and analytic side as well. there is not a single one of these candidates i wish i could have recruited somebody else to run in their place. thank you for coming out. the floor is yours >> i will just do one so we get to as many people possible in the time we have. let me -- you were talking about a good meeting yesterday with mr. trump. there was a report in politico recently that said unlike with the democrats, the dccc is in close communication with the clinton campaign, that mr. simms says he has no contact with the presidential campaign. >> let me suggest part of the difference is as you know in the presidential situation the rnc
and the presidential campaign begin to merge pretty rapidly. ryan was in the meeting and trump was complimentary and said now i know him and see what the rnc is all about. we work directly with the rnd. we know at the dnc they had fights over bernie sanders and the chairman and who is running what and their finances are in pretty bad shape. we have a very good communication strategy working through the rnc. but rob? >> what the chairman said was precisely my point in that article and with that quote which is our work, most courts align with the rcn upstairs and i would not suggest that was unusual at all particularly if you work at the lowest estates that the trump campaign released in the 17 or so states they
expect to be most targeted. for us and the seats that are most that have been washed and our nominee and whatever controversy or anything else reported on. after the 2012 elections, chairman and his team undertook an exhaustive review of the previous election and an opportunity report was produced. one thing that was clear before any candidate announced was the rnc can no longer be in a position of gearing up and staffing up in the final four
months of a presidential election. it revolutionized and revamped what the structure was going to be and how they were going to function in a four year period so when we had a nominee, whoever that nominee would be and the democratic campaign with president obama and outside groups spent a trumend hazard - tremendous amount of money attacking him. today, they have several hundred staff people on the ground in these targeted and swing states that have been employed by the rnc.
>> do you know how many house members are going? are you inviting them to go or telling them to stay home and campaign? >> i don't know the number. it is pretty significant. >> we haven't seen a final number of those types of things. i have suspected we will get a final list next week. but as you know, for most of these cases they are done for the state delegations and the state parties, where some of the members are delegates and attending with their delegation. so i suspect we will see a finalist next week. i suspect there will be a significant number of members there. we don't advice them one way or the other -- advise. it is up to them. most of us are busy at home in our districts. i listened to john mccain's
acceptance speech as my wife and i were going out to go camping. >> there was an issue they didn't want to talk about and it seems like they think this is a winning political issue now to talk about. do you think they think anything they can create on the left with that issue will cause problems for your members? who do you think you will be able to contrast that? >> it gets back district by district and each make up their own mind. it gets down to constitutional rights and due process. what we saw play out on the house floor and seen come forward in terms of their hash
tag campaign flies in the rights of protecting everybody's rights. we need to make sure terrorists don't have access to weapons foreignists don't buy them. we need the fbi to do good. >> i believe 202 was the final count on the mental health reform legislation which has been several years in the making. it deserves a tremendous amount
of credit as do many of his cosponsors on the republican side. one thing that has been lost in the gun control debate is the mental health component of some of these tragic incident and the changes congressman murphy's bill will make could have a tremendous impact. >> the data shows if you have a serious mental health issue and are not getting help you are 15 times more likely to harm yourself or someone else with a violent act. we can make progress here. i did roundtables on this, talked to families, providers, law enforcement. this is an i area we can make a difference. >> next to john slab. >> looked at democrats using donald trump as their boogie man. republicans drawing on someone
as unpopular as secretary clinton is that an issue for the republicans to use? scott garret of new jersey thought -- inaudible. his opponent used to work for bill clinton. >> that would be a unique situation where you could easily make that case. i believe it is easier to tie a democrat to hillary clinton than a republican to donald trump for a couple reasons. i think we would all to admit donald trump his own brand. he has not shied away from that. hillary clinton is the democratic establishment candidate. given what happened in the last couple weeks all of this view that a lot of us have and this
transfers to a mothership here and what does that mean and who gets what appointments. you see today, the day after the justice department closes its investigation, the state department reopens there on ms. clinton and staff. there is a lot there. americans have a lot of questions and she has a long record. when you do the polling and poll in the districts we are competitive in and where the races are really going to be you find she is less poplar than donald trump. this isn't going to be an election held in a vacuum. you are spot-on. there are two nominees at least.
she is a drag on the party. she is more unpopular than donald trump in the competitive districts and in those districts our data show this is recent, but voters want to vote republican republican for congress. >> you were quoted back in december after mr. trump came out with his proposed ban on muslims saying this isn't what we are as a party or a country, we cannot yield to this, and according to the cook political report, no relation, you said it puts certainly competitive seats in jeopardy and we will have a much more difficult time unquote. you just said that ms. clinton is a drag. is trump a drag? >> that was back in december. nothing has happened since then. so things evolved. what we now know looking at the data is that hillary clinton is
a bigger drag in our competitive seats than donald trump. that is not necessarily -- somebody can probably find a district where that is not the case. i understand that. as we look overall, this is what we are seeing. they are either equal or she is less poplar. i think part of that, too, if you look at it, and i think the national media polls release bear this out. the independent swing voters look at talk and perform more like republicans than democrats. even through the primary process where the narrative driven is all of the imcumbants are in trouble because these voters will come in and throw them out and there is a ground swell of
outsid outsid outsid outsider ank. and the ones loosing are a reflection of redistricting changes. not a single member lost because of an environment issue or outside forces working against them or things of that nature. so the trump voters are continuing to support our candidate in the district. the middle of the road voters want to vote republican on barometers like the generic ballot and they will lean in favorability showing they are there and there is emphasis in that context and not just a direct line from the presidential election down to the congressional level. >> john? >> thank you, dave.
>> mr. chairman, you and rob speak forcefully about there being no there there and the incumbents thinking donald trump is the boogie man. let me point out a couple things that increasingly the incumbent republicans who we never looked at before are vulnerable. darryl isa now has a strong opponent in a state where the field poll show last week hillary clinton leading donald trump by 30 percentage points. in new york, two upstate races where republicans retired, the nominees on paper should be shoe ins. they are having to work hard.
are you spending more on incumbent retention this year than previous cycles? >> we have 247 members today and number of retireees. tled only make sense to spend more on the incumbents. we have offensive opportunities as well. you know, jack martin taking the steve israel seat. that is a real possible win for us. jack is in this third term as the state senate and comes from the more democratic part of that district. i think it is a net zero pvi or maybe one point. jack is a great recruit and candidate. chris gibson's race was expensive for chris and he was
the incumbent to hold that. when he retired i wasn't particularly happy. in this job you don't want nearly any of your members to reti retire. we are pleased with john faso. he won in the primary and is well positioned to hold that seat. chris gibson was campaigning on three parades in the fourth of july. they will do it together. >> with the isa seat in particular you had other dynamics at play. a democratic presidential primary in california that at least going into the final days was still competitive, there is a college population in mr. isa's district in san diego that i think you could say was feeling the burn.
and mr. trump had lost out the republican nomination. we didn't have that going into the primary. going into the general election, mr. isa is i think sitting on about $4 million and i think he is engaged in running a real campaign. if the democrats want to make a run at mr. isa in that district with his position and with his campaign i would say good luck to them. >> just an update... >> i think you have several dynamics. new york 22 is a swingy seat that mr. hannah had held for several cycles. you have a dynamic with an independent candidate who is in the process of qualifying to be on the ballot.
he is going to be on an independent ballot line. we have to see what the ballot looks like and what that means going forward. >> do we know more about time? >> francine from the monitor is next. >> thanks for coming. i would like to ask you about what is going on with support for tea party type freedom caucus candidates. my understanding is they will be going -- we will be loosing some of those members in congress, somewhere i read by about a third because of retirement. and i don't know if that is accurate. but i average we are loosing a significant number because of
retirement. so my question is what is the outlook look like for that wing of the party and the elections coming up and what happened to the political fervor around voters? trump has done everything and it is like whatever happened to these people? what is going on in that wing of the party? >> our job is to maintain the majority, grow the majority, make sure paul ryan comes back as speaker, or we have a republican speaker. i don't divide up how that works based on which caucus you are part of within our conference. we have the tuesday group people, clinton caucus, unaffiliated people. we just look at the races we need to be part of to elect are republican. i don't have the data you are asking.
there were times where cook clawson being active and maybe a few others. i think john said six. i don't know -- and ibmost of those districts, by the way, there would be solid republican districts. >> what is your sense of the political ferver that was so strong? where is it now? >> i don't think if is at t2010 level. i think in part because you no longer have a run away barack obama, nancy pelosi, harry reid washington. there are checks and balances. so you don't have the same energy of make them stop. this is where you got obamacare. and wait until the premiums are finalized on november first. i am seeing carriers pull out on the individual markets and rates
not more than double digits but mid double digits. there is a lot going on. that energy is still there. some is paying out for mr. trump or mr. cruz or others. and i think that energy will not be denied at the ballot box in the fall. they will turn out. the questions i have is what do the bernie sanders thinks about the kids working hard and they win a state and ms. clinton gets more delegates because the system is rigged. it is interesting to see where the energy plays up. >> all the evidence shows ticket
splitting has been in a decline. in wisconsin, where my newspaper is, it is basically vanished. where hillary clinton is the drag, or donald trump is the drag, doesn't it make it more difficult than it would have been in the past to overcome that? do you factor that into your calculus? >> we do analysis district by district. the data publically available is more nationalized. so we drove down district by district, race by race, and look at where the swing voters are and what they are concerned about. >> let's take a district like wisconsin eight where it is open and donald trump numbers are bad consistently in the polling and state. in the district you have an outgoing republican member who is outspokingly critical of donald trump. it seems like there is a potential for a top of the ticket and a drag for them.
>> we have 26 seats defending the cycle won by president obama in '08 and '12. that shows they are splitting the ticket. the state of wisconsin a perfect example. i don't believe it has gone republican in a presidential cycle since 1988 and that would include speaker ryan's district. >> right. he carried all of those districts because of the composition of the districts even though obama won state-wide. >> i believe barack obama won speaker ryan's district. >> so, demonstrating ticket splitting. >> all of the districts are carried by romney and the republicans won at the house. >> if you are suggesting that donald trump is going to lose
wisconsin eight that is a different issue. i think the bigger issue for us is going back to the 26 districts, which i think, are -- everyone would agree is the battlefield for the house in this cycle the voters demonstrated they would split the ticket. everything we see in the data and districts and polling and analytical work we have been doing shows the voters today are splitting their tickets. could that change over the next four months? sure. but god knows things have changed over five months when we were speculating about who would be the republican presidential nominee and how it would work. the data we are seeing in the districts all over the country, as well as where we can extrapolate and project where
the data is, the voters in districts like wisconsin 8 want to vote for a republican member of congress and we will good whoever the nominee is in that district will be able to maintain the seat. >> in 2010, remember we took back the seat and he beat a democrat. >> sorry about that. two questions. how concerned are you about the zika virus funding if they don't have anything before we adjourn for the summer? it looks like you will decrease the number of women in the house conference. is that a concern? and let the grow project grow and other areas why are they not
succeeding? >> let me start with zika virus. we have from the get go provided a fund for the rest of the fiscal year using funds unspent today to depend. there was surplus money set aside allocated for ebola that will not be spent. i think it was 700-some million available. don't hold me to that. i don't have the data in front of me but it was a considerable amount. and we moved forward with funding for the next fiscal year which doesn't start until september. we are working on that. it is an issue of great concern especially for our members more down in the southern part of the country where this mosquito is. so we are trying to figure out and make sure we get the money in the right places to do the right work at the right time. we always tried to address the issue of spraying for mosquitos
and changing some of the regulations that slow down that effort to actually do the vector control that needs to be done there. we will continue and committed to finding a way through this. so, in terms of recruitment of women. we have a very aggressive effort to do that. we have talented members within our conference who have headed that and will continue to do this. we will always be focused on growing minority members within our conference, women members within our conference, have tried their best and we will continue to try. it is hard, you know, in many cases, finding people to run for these offices regardless of any those criteria. this is a tough job. we will continue to remain focused on treatment of women and helping them in their campaigns.
i am telling you ann wagoner, diane black and we have talented women and the highest elected republican woman i say in the world is kathy morris rogers is integral in that area. we have to do more and continue to work on it. we have real talent to draw upon. >> we had our young meeting with 11 republican nominees in targeted districts and three of those candidates are women. we have several primaries that have to be voted through still. particulary in florida where we could have nominees that are women. this as a focus on our part and it has been throughout the tenure of the chairman. i think this is a longer term effort for us that will have to go on and all the way down
five that we won out of seven. we are down to two. one is an open seat in arizona and we will not know the outcome of the primary until later in august. the other is minnesota which is colin peterson's seat. we run the board on seats we should go pickup because they traditionally want to vote for a republican for president. we are playing in the purple and blue territory to a high level as a d-plus six or seven. so my guess is you have got a dozen or more seats that i think the battleground is usually about 20 seats. but i think our members are well positioned and we plan to be on offense. that is why our first group of premier challenger candidates or new candidates we will say because some are open seats is
really strong. if you think of john bacon in omaha, they came in and spent 433,000 and told voters he was more moderate and beat the primary canada with 66% of the vote. mr. maxwell became 53-47 a few years before that. general john maxwell is very well positioned. out to california, sheriff scott johns is against omny bear. we are matching our ability to
lay down money. >> what was the number of republicans? >> i don't where you heard that from. >> i think one of the things that has been lost in a lot of the constitution of this is the democrats had an absolutely -- discussion -- abyssmal cycle. if you look at tom mcarthur, they could not recruit and lost a candidate to an individual going through bankruptcy proceedings and is worth $600. if you look at several other districts where they had tremendous recruitment failures including michigan 8 where they touted melissa gilbert from little house on the prairie and dancing with the stars fame who they are trying to in a back room get off the battle and
chose somebody else because her campaign was an unmitigated disaster. there is a context to these seats in play. they spend a lot of time talking about eric paulson in minnesota. i am tell you now i am not going to take away the story for him but what he has done this quarter fundraising wise will blow everyone's socks off. i understand what they are doing. they are doing what we would be doing in a similar situation with a lot of these people. it doesn't bear out to say they are 70-80 feet within play. >> beyond that they don't claim they will get the majority. that is 29. they will not tell you they have
a path to victory to get the majority. i think members are doing an incredibly good job in their community. they vote that district and there people in their district know that. they went from speaking no spanish to debating in spanish. it is remarkable. there is a national narrative i respect but it does drill down district by district, race by race, and that is what we look at; the data in those district district by district what is going on. it is only a snapshot in time. you can pull up a quote from december and i am going to tell
you we are always looking in the rear view mirror and this shows our members in strong shape and hillary clinton worse off than donald trump in terms of fame and unfame. what happens between now and november we will be watching and adjusting. >> question for you. you touched earlier on the rnc and the job they are doing on the ground and in various swing states. there is not a lot of talk about the trump xanl campaign and how they are forced to pickup the operation in many ways. how worried are you that the rnc is serving to harm congressional when it comes to resources and
money? >> again, ryan did a great job, started early, addressed the issues that needed to be addressed at the rnc going back several years. compared to the funding, compare to the dnc. one did well and one is broke. the relationship to the candidates? i cannot imagine what he goes through trying to manage a primary season and did it skillfully and has a great team. during that, they developed the best data center in republican history. they put field staff on the ground for a long period of time. for the dnc there is not a lot of field staff on the ground but the rnc does. it begins to balance out and they are not only our landlord they are a great partner with us. we have no complaints about where they are and their ability
to work with us in the appropriate ways. none. none. none. >> could you ask them to turn down the music? even though we like having theme music here. eric garcia from role call. [inaudible question] >> my question to you is talking about donald trump and my question to you is where would you say there are a number of people coming out saying they will not vote for mr. trump and what do you think about that? do you think that would be beneficial to go district by district?
>> i think each candidate and member will make their own decisions about their own views and represent their district's views effectively. they are best able to do that. we don't run a cookie cutter campaign approach that sets out any mandates or requirements across the country to tell every candidate they have to do this, that or the other thing. we tell them you need a data plan, budget and organizational grass root plan that fits your district and we will hold you accountable to make sure you meet the target so there is a path to break free. beyond that, do what you need to do in your district to represent the people you seek to represent. >> and i would suggest in a couple districts the democrats have a problem, too. ask peterson if he is voting for clinton? mcnoland endorsed bernie sanders and he is one of the best pickup opportunities on the offense
side. he did that ideology because his voting record shows pretty far to the left for that district and minnesota but hillary clinton said she wants to put the mining business out of business which is a death sentence in the iron range in northeastern wisconsin or i am sorry northeastern minnesota near the wisconsin border. there are two sides to this presidential dynamic in several of these seats. we had a case with mr. ashford who was caught on film in a parade in omaha where a constituent asked him innocently what party are you a member of and where do you identify with and he said i will be whatever party you want me too. this is a man who has changed parties multiple time and i would argue in this environment
with the view toward dc politicians the way they are and the angst going on that is an absurd statement to make. his history shows he wasn't just saying that flippantly. that is who he is. so again the national environment, the national dynamics and the things at the top of the ticket in all of these cases, can push and pull different ways depending on which district we are talking about. >> thank you. good question. >> i am sorry if i missed the remarks. but would you -- looking at the map and what you are looking to do this election, what would a good night look like in november? democrats who thought they were playing offense cycle were
hoping, you know, maybe after donald trump became the nominee they were rubbing their hands together and thinking it might be a better night for them. do you think you are -- would you elaborate more? >> i think we are planning for a good night. the biggest number of republicans in the house since 1928. 1928. and so we knew going into the cycle that we would have our work to do not only to hold that majority but also look at the opportunities. my goal is to hold the majority and look at the opportunities. we know we have seats in play including retirements and open seats that have problems, too. i think it is too early to predict what that might look like. i don't think if we sat here in 2010 we would say we will have the biggest majority since world war ii.
and out the driveway, two years ago we were scoffed out loudly and strongly and every other adjective you want to use. we exceeded that. if we had the election today we would be in good shape of maintaining pretty much where we have at and i hope that continues as we go into the general election. so if you hear the dccc and i talk to people who go to their meetings and say they are not talking about getting the majority and they know it is not realistic. then they read they will expand the playing field to 80 seats. i don't see that. there is a range there. i don't know what it is yet, but i don't think it is a wide range. >> do you plan on using a sit-in when you campaign against democrats in the district? a message they have been using
is the republican majority hasn't been passing legislation on the xyz. does the sit-in comp li -- complicate that? >> they violated the rules and the democratic campaign committee used an issue like the violence in orlando as a fundraising scheme. period. they did it repeatedly through the night. >> is there anybody who hasn't had one before we do a second round? yes, sir, from dallas. jaime? >> down in texas, trump made
comments and he is trying hard to connect to the national campaign. i gather from what you have been saying so far you don't think -- i am curious on what you felt about that and the race in general. and given the arrest in dallas last night and the gun-related incidences across the country over the last few weeks and months how do you think it impacts the gun debate toward november and the political climate? >> again, let me say as i did in my open comments, all of my thoughts and prayers are with the people of dallas and those who lost lives but with those in batton rouge and falcon heights as well. each situation has its own unique circumstances and we don't have the facts in all of the cases but certainly this is an issue all americans are concerned about. as for the race on the border,
they showed the campaign to be effective last time and take out incumbent diego. since that time he has demonstrated what an effective, talented and skillful legislature he is, what a thoughtful representative he is, and he has worked his tail off in his district district. he has an enormous work ethic and knows how to run an effective and positive campaign. you have to have more than just trying to tag somebody to somebody else to go beat somebody. can it be an ingredient in a campaign? of course. hillary clinton, pelosi, whoever they want to pick or we want to pick. but at the core those are
>> places where trump is unpopular would you authorize members to run -- >> we don't allow or authorize them. i am just saying, hawaii run their own races. it is a partnership. we don't control the content of their ads. they are going to do what they need to do in their districts to represent the voters. they get to make those choices in the campaign and we work collaboratively with them. and based on what their own personal views and philosophy and the voters make the choice. we stay out of spending money in
primaries. we give advice and council but they make the decision on how the campaigns are run. >> here is the last question. >> i wanted to return to a question about zika virus funding. if something isn't done before the summer recess and there is an outbreak and it becomes a serious issue it seems to me democrats think it is winning political issue to them because they suggested republicans put in poison pill things within that bill that forced their hand in blocking it. and blocking with funding for planned parenthood and things like that. and republicans said democrats are making up reasons to vote against it for political purposes. why do you think your members, in particularly the ones in southern states, would be able to argue.
>> this is what americans are upset about. they want us coming and doing their job. the fiscal year ends at the end of september; right? so the outline should be covered to the funding by this administration. this has been authorized. we argue over what starts october 1st in the next fiscal year. i met with the head of the nih and the person looking to come up with a vaccine.
this horrible disease is similar to others we have vaccines for. it is a disese we know how to create a vaccine. he said it will take a year and a year and a half to get a safe vaccine but they are confidant they can get there. there is nothing standing in their way to move forward on getting that vaccine. our efforts try to expedite the spraying for mosquitos was blocked by the democrats. for the life of me i don't know why they object to using existing money that is there to go pay for this. we should be able to work this out that is what people expect us to do. i would hope they would not use