tv Newsmakers CSPAN July 20, 2014 10:00am-10:31am EDT
questions about this lawsuit and the president. if republicans are successful, any worries that this will ring about an imbalance of political power? >> i think there is always that worry. i don't like to go to a branch of government to get back the power that i should have retained. article one isn't working well. we don't have members of the house and senate standing up for article one. they are stand up for party instead of standing up for the constitution. this lawsuit isn't the best idea we have. it is one of the only ideas left in our quiver to bring the power back to capital. >> when you look at the number of executive orders and compare obama to president george w. bush, he has had far fewer. >> two things are true. executive orders are usually the area we talk about executive
overreach. in obama's case it is not that he is operating through executive orders. he is ignoring statutes in rewriting things his own way. we would not be in this situation today if republicans were as tough on republican presidents as they have been on president obama. we would not be in this circumstance if democrats were as tough on president obama as they were on president bush. defending the constitution is an obligation to the congress as that we have not been fulfilling. that is not a year or two or three, that is a decade or two or three. d'amatos?the alfonse >> when the president says so sue me, what is your reaction?
>> i hate that it has become that cavalier. this is serious business. this is not heady partisan politics. this is about the coequal ranch of the government. this is about the balance of powers. we are going to sue the president. not because we are happy about it but because we have no other choice. our friends at knoll canning sued the president. the supreme court said whether they were the most liberal or conservative justices that the president had overstepped his bounds and what he was doing was unconstitutional. not a word came out of our democratic colleagues in the senate to stand up for the institution against that article to abuse. congressman i wanted to follow-up about the leadership
making the decision to only go with a lawsuit over the employer mandate. forld there be other areas lawsuit and why go with one and this specific one? of bringing sense articles of impeachment? how does that tie into this effort to sue? impeachmentn process that happens every four years. the people knew what they were getting into this last time around. they voted to sign back up with president obama. i'm not interested in going to that exercise. i want to make a difference. i don't see us going down that road. as for the lawsuit, i am glad we narrowed it. we did this not to make a point but to make a difference. and we talked to legal scholars they said if you throw all of your grievances into one piece
of legislation you won't get a standing. it will look like a political stunt. if you narrow your grievances down, that is how we'll get this to the court front door. it is broader than the employer mandate. able to talk about the whole friday of issues. this is not the republican house suing to stop the implementation of obamacare. it is fascinating that we are having this constitutional crisis around these terms. i can think of no better terms to have around. >> there was discussion about suing over immigration and some of the decisions on not enforcing or using discretion. that is an area where his specific claim of prosecutors will -- wouldtors
you have pretty furred to see that challenge over obamacare? why not go for a second challenge on that? >> this is the president's language. if he did not want this language than he could've proposed different language. this bill was not ready for prime time. it should never have been passed. was, the president cannot now avail himself of a theory that the language was not right and he is going to fix it to the executive process. the other issues i disagree with our things where we would follow the law that he does not want to follow. in the case of the affordable care act, it is his law. he proposed this. he does not think we crafted that law correctly rated than he back and act -- come
have us do it correctly. >> on the policy front we have been discussing the affordable care act. i am curious, isn't this an area where republicans have been criticizing for not putting --th a comprehensive of alternative? you have a bill. there has been a long-running battle between the leadership and the house republican leadership over whether that bill is going to reach the floor. was an advocate. are you going to carry the torch now that you are taking over? >> i am. a lot of people if they want to disparage the rsc, nothing could be further from the truth. people want results for the families they represent back home.
you need to look no further than our health care alternative to see that there are areas where we would concede that the president has changed the hearts and minds of the american people. there are some ideas that we would keep. there is a better way to bring costs down. there is a better way to make sure that people receive the care that they need. there is a way to make the thomas true that if you like your dr. you can keep it. i could not be prouder of the rsc for solutions like that. to dot are you prepared specifically to get this a bill to the floor for a vote? that is the source of much frustration of your colleagues. ithe leadership has given the red light and it is not going to see the house floor. >> in the same way that i tell you we would not be in this crisis if republicans had been
tougher on republicans. we do need to be careful of how we push our ideas forward. we have not gone through the regular order of process. to say take our bill and no amendments, that is not the way we like to operate. we have rules. we want to bring our bill through based on the rules. look at dave camp. he spent two years working on a tax reform alternative. he can't get it through to the floor for a vote either. we are working together with other people to move through the process. a bad process leads to a better product. this is a good product. i want to see it move your regular order and see it move to the floor for a vote this year. >> the difference between health care reform and tax reform is that i can january, there was a
promise made by the leadership to get a vote on a health care alternative this year. now are you are looking at a few things remaining before the november midterms. is it feasible to expect that promise to be fulfilled? >> i feel like you are looking into my heart. you are identifying my biggest frustration. when we make a commitment to do something, we should do it. there is a right way and a wrong way to do it. i don't want anyone to say that the rsc can't defend its ideas. i think it is a fantastic bill. it though through that process. i want to see it made into the best it can be made for all of my colleagues. i want to see it on the floor for a vote. we are trying to keep those thomas's.
ofhave a brand-new member congress taking over the floor schedule on the first day. we have a new majority leader. i can assure you he will be hearing from me on this scheduling issue. >> i want to switch quickly to another issue where the rsc was influential last year. resolutions and the fact that we ended up in a government shutdown. riders onesee obamacare to be attached to the appropriations process this year? are we headed for a government shutdown? i reject the premise that because we add writers that sends us to a government shutdown. n extraneous a thing. i have an obligation to can
stroll the pursestrings. let's of the financial services appropriation bill as an example. bill in thepassed a three years i have been in congress. they haven't done one in the three yearsthat the that the democrats were in charge. the rsc got involved at a framework level. they got our ideas included and got our writers included. that bill came out of committee as best it could. then we worked it on the floor to improve it more. that is a successful passage of legislation. the you can count on from rsc is getting in on that ground level as often as we can to make sure that the product can pass
and we can move forward. >> that is true for the initial passage through the house. when you go to conference with the senate, where is the rsc? what you just mentioned about the process early on, it is fascinating and does change that part of it. how do you translate that to the end of process, a conference for the chairman go behind closed doors and work it out? >> it is hard to imagine the conference report to comes back that the rsc is enthusiastic about. ae senate believes in completely different thing about the future of the american economy. rsc i view the role of the is making sure the house product that goes into conference is the most conservative, thoughtful product it can be. it is going to be adulterated in conference. if the conference report comes
back and we can't vote for it, that may be the way it has to be. if the democratic leadership has signed off on it as well, we will have an obligation to put those votes of the board. because the rsc has to vote no on a conference report, we are in the process of shutting things down. quite the opposite is true. we are in the business of keeping things going. i am proud of the people who work so hard to make it happen. >> there is a specific issue with obamacare that the majority of the republican conference would not vote for a spending bill that included the funding of for it. is ats the key question that point in the process, will there be bills at the rsc can't vote for that lead us to a government shutdown? you that if iell
could define what the resident used going into this last half of the year, i view a government shutdown is something the president would love to see happen. he would love to blame republicans for that. that is not where the rsc is headed. it was a continuing resolution. ist we have done here providing the house framework so i hope we don't end up with that continuing resolution. n appropriations an bill that brings in so much of that language the we have hammered out together. i hear what you are saying. i know the house has done the kind of fork this summer to prevent us from andy out there.
if we end up there it won't be because of the senate. >> relations between this white house and republicans in congress are strained. it is at a new low. are both sides to blame? withill still have to work this president for the next two years. >> the secret service caught --eone trying to it is a tough job at the white house. i want to work with the president. i can't get my agenda without the president's signature on a bill. i know i am not going to get everything i want. i want to make some progress forward. if you give republicans the senate in november the american people will do that. we will have a functioning article one process.
we will have bills on the president desk. he will sign them or veto them. we will begin to make this town work again. we will have the views of our founding fathers again. we have the higher more heroes act. if you're trying to hire those veterans won't count against your obamacare threshold. plus tod the house 400 one. it has not moved forward on the senate. that is a kind of bill we want to see on the president's desk. i think the president wants to sign that. i reject a narrative that we can't work with this president. preventing us from find out if we can work with this president. is barack obama an effective
president? got more of his agenda a compost and any other president in my lifetime. believes,ieve what he he has done an amazing amount. being effective in achieving his goals has done irreparable damage to the trust in this nation. it has not been a good thing for america. divided government gives us a chance to do big things. if we jim things through then people don't like it. we have serious problem's in this country. divided government gives us a shot at solving those problems. i don't want a president who wants to claim political points.
i want him to work with me to do the big things that every american knows needs to be done. >> when we talk about the blame game in washington, there is plenty to go around. part of the reason that washington has not worked is because of the infighting in the republican party. there was talk earlier this year of a shakeup in the leadership this november heading into the 114th congress. sooner than expected when the majority leader went down in his primary. there are some leadership elections. the expect there to be another hotly contacted leadership election in november for the speakership or majority leader? >> i hope so. i don't know when competition started to be a bad thing around here.
the worst possible scenario is a bunch of republicans complaining that things were different but then not stepping up to make things different. >> that is what we saw a couple of weeks ago. a republican study committee elevated to the elected leadership table. that does not happen regularly. i think it is healthy for this conference. you saw the majority leader's race. said i am not going to be part of institution that anoints its next round of leaders. i will make sure there is a competitive collection and people have to be chosen rather than anointed. that is who we are. it is not supposed to be pretty. ands supposed to be down dirty because we are fighting for america amongst ourselves. when we open up that conference
door and walked out front, we try to be united to make a difference for the people we serve back home. >> as well liked as mr. scully's the role of the whip is not much asmine policies as it is to sell the agenda to the rest of the conference. are you satisfied as a conservative only having one of your guys in the whip post? would you like to see somebody take a shot at the mid jordi leader post or speakership? would like to see more rock ribbed conservatives on the ballot in leadership positions. we have a lot of talent in this conference. i want to see that talent compete for the hearts and minds of the conference as a whole. let me push back on what his job is going to be as majority whip.
he is not going to count the votes. his job is going to be to share with the leadership this is where you can get the votes if only you would be willing to do those kinds of things that are in concert with the principles that most people share. that is what the leadership wants to do. they have a job to do. they want to see legislation move forward. they are not going to rally votes for a bad proposal. you don't have to work so hard to rally votes for it because it is art he captured them. >> i am looking for some intelligence here. to look at the supplemental bill? what is your understanding of where this is going right now? will there be changes to the
trafficking law in addition to the money in order to pass through the house? >> i don't think it is a litmus test. money're going to provide to deal with a crisis then you need to provide a solution to prevent the crisis from continuing. that is something that has been so absent in the residence order conversation. he is good to identify problems. he is not good at identifying how they will solve those problems. that is what conservatives want. you will not find bigger hearts for children than what you find in the rsc. feed someone today that allows supposed to die in the desert tomorrow does not satisfy our moral compass. we have got to solve that problem.
the 2008 law is implicated in that. that i havetell you a you must do this in order to get my vote. you must do something to stop the problem and not just treat the problem. that is going to be the challenge. i have not booked my calendar to handle that. >> can i press you on one thing? so your colleagues have raised the idea of rolling back policies like deportation. do you think that should be attached to this spending bill? should that be rolled back through legislation? >> that is a great example of how irresponsible talk in washington has consequences. that america'ss
stance on excepting children has changed. accept thesey to kids will risk my child's life for transport into america. i think the law has a place for them. the law does not have a place for them. we have to say that loud and clear. not provide that place. help distill some of the misinformation in central america? i think it would. we cannot get engaged in these hypotheticals. the president has dragged us down without those decisions having consequences. the consequences are tragically dangerous trips for children to the american border. we can do better as a country. >> i want to follow-up on the
line about rock ribbed conservatives? a rockribbedehner conservative? >> it is hard to come out of ohio as a rockribbed conservative. he was in his first term. his job is different now. entire is to lead the house of representatives. that is a hard job on its easiest day. i admire him for the work that he is done. joinngressman rob woodall us. conversation.e i think there has been for lack of a better term a blood thirst among conservatives in the conference for the last several years that have been officially this appointed with
their leadership, especially from a strategic standpoint. 2010came to washington in to shake the place up. they were very aggressive on the policy front. the issue of tax reform. we heard about privacy bills rate in the nsa. are the priorities coming into 2014. it became apparent about two or three weeks into 2014 that those bills would not see the light of day. toservatives attribute that the uppermost echelon of the leadership. when mr. cantor goes down and he mccarthy,d by mr. the does not appease conservative bloodlust.
does this satisfy some of these conservatives who for months and months and years have been scheming to infiltrate the upper echelon of leadership? probably not. will hear about people taking a crack at speaker boehner. there is going to be a lot of conservative support to find him. >> speaker boehner hinted that the immigration supplement may not go through both houses of congress before august. >> if i were guessing right now i would say that was a good bet. the president says he would be open to some of the changes to existing law. what you have seen in the last week or so is a dramatic backtracking by congressional democrats from those changes. that makes a huge difference. turns the immigration policy that we of known for the
last several years on its head. democrats were united in wanting a legalization bill and republicans were divided on that, in this instance you have republicans united in saying we have to change the law and make people leave they can't get legal status or disappear into the shadows. democrats are now divided on some of that. can't are saying we change the law that we have. we have to welcome these children and process them and treat them well. this is for humanitarian reasons. it is a difficult issue to solve. i would be surprised to see a deal gets done before they get home. think from a republican standpoint you may be dealing with a half circle situation. that is probably the best case situation. speaker banner adapts some of
what the white house is asked for in terms of immigration funding. this is a number if speaker boehner attempts to appropriate the emergency funding before everyone goes for the august recess, i highly doubt you're going to get a majority on board, unless there's some policy riders specifically attached that would deal with some of these issues that republicans have been unhappy with pertaining to immigration over the last several years, but i do think it's very, very unlikely that the president is going to get exactly what he asked for. >> for your questions and insight, tim alberta, tim dinan, gentlemen, thank you both for being with us. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> awe we are 50 miles south and west ofes