tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN September 9, 2016 5:00pm-7:01pm EDT
that members have gone. mr. vice chairman, do you have any closing comment? >> i would like to thank the witnesses for appearing here and certainly very helpful. mr. mica: again, i thank ms. duckworth and the minority for working with us. this isn't a partisan issue in any way. this is an issue that has affected hundreds of thousands of great americans. i thank you again for being with us and coming. we've got some work ahead of us. we will all pledge to work together. there being no further business before the subcommittee, this hearing is adjourned. thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by .ational captioning institute]
>> earlier today, former louisiana senator attended that house oversight subcommittee hearing on louisiana flooding and the federal response. she served three terms in the senate and was in office when hurricane katrina made landfall in august, 2005. she chaired the senate energy and natural resources committee from 2014 to 2015. if you missed any of today's hearing on the louisiana flooding, we'll be showing it again tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. other programming --
>> this weekend, book tv brings you 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors. and here are some of our programs for this coming weekend. saturday night at 9:00 eastern, new york city principal talks about starting an inner city middle school in her book "the bridge to brilliance: how one principal in in a tough community is inspiring the world." she was featured on the humans of new york website which subsequently went viral. at 10:00, former u.s. attorney general alberto gonzalez talks about his life during the george w. bush administration in his book "true faith and allegiance." he's interviewed by brett kendall, "wall street journal" legal affairs reporter. >> there have been several memoirs written, people's perspectives have been out there. and i thought it might be
important to add mine, for my son's sake, quite honestly, there's been a lot written and said about me. some of it true, some of it not true. i wanted them to get my perspective about the events that shaped me and really affected their lives as well. >> sunday at 7:45 p.m. eastern, political cartoonist discusses his latest book "30 years of doonsberry on trump" about his use of donald trump as a character in his economic strip. he speaks at a book store here in washington, d.c. plus, douglas cohen on the lessons u.s. presidents learned during their first years in office. hn strausbaugh and gregory malveaux. go to booktv.org for the complete weekend schedule. >> this sunday night on q&a, author and columnist david k. johnston discusses his book "the making of donald trump"
which takes a critical look at the republican presidential nominee. >> i met donald. i immediately recognized that he's selling you tickets to the fiji mermaid and the amazing two-headed woman. then i started, because he was the dominant force in atlantic city, i started asking about him and his competitors, including steve wynn, and people who work for him, and some big gamblers, all said to me, donald doesn't know anything about the casino business. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific on c-span's q&a. >> smithsonian institution, we're talking with cedric. he's the curator for the national september 11 collection. thanks for talking with us. >> thank you for having me. >> we're looking at a collection of pieces, what are we looking at? >> we're looking at the september 11 collection, here. the collection represents all three of the attack sites, we have here shanksville,
pennsylvania. and in the middle we have the pentagon and on the far right we have the world trade center. >> how did you get these pieces? >> we sent curators to each one of the attack sites soon after attacks occurred. the curators spent their time looking at three specific collecting focal point. they looked at the attacks themselves, the recovery effort, and the first respahn responders. they chose -- first responders. they chose to focus on just three elements of september 11 because oys otherwise it would have been far too enormous to try and come and capture. it's very emotional to be able to just separate the story from what was happening. would have been very difficult. with those three they were able to really create a representative story about what happened on that day. >> some of these pieces making the unveiling for the first time with interesting stories.
from the pennsylvania -- pentagon, a note. tell us about this note. >> yes, we were contacted by the donor. they had a very interesting story. daria and frank worked at the pentagon and when the attacks occurred, they both met at a prearranged site and that was their car. daria got there first and left this note for her husband, frank, letting him know that everything was ok and that she's going to go to a more traditional evacuation area. it's a wonderful piece because it reminds us that, well, in 2001 cell phones weren't ubiquitous and if i understand correctly, cell phone coverage that day was spotty because of the massive number of people trying to call emergency services, call their loved ones. it's a good question. what would you do when -- to
contact your loved ones, when you don't have access? it's something today that's so much more difficult for us to understand because cell phone is everywhere. what would you do? this simple note helps us better understand. >> on the table, some pieces of plane, some office effects. we're looking also at a jacket that came from the world trade center. what is this jacket? what's its story? >> this jacket belongs blanced to dee smith. she was an employee of the salvation army. i think it's really significant because it tells a story about who took care of the first responders, who took care of the family members that were down at ground zero, who took care of the law enforcement officers, the people who were at ground zero, first responders, recovery workers, you know, and family members, those we know and expect. but at the end of the day, someone was feeding them. the recovery workers were
working 24/7, three shifts a day, somebody gave them clothing when they were cold. most of this is happening in the late fall/winter of 2001 and 2002. making sure everybody was warm. there was a place for people to meet. there's no question, we're trying to help our visitors and future researchers understand that there was much more going on than just the recovery effort and we wanted to make sure that people understood. >> you spent a lot of time putting these collections together. what do you want people to take away from looking at them and experiencing them? >> what we're hoping is that by providing this objects out of storage approach, it's not your standard exhibit. you can come and you can look at the objects just as they are now, you can walk up, there won't be any cases. you'll be able to interact with our territorial staff -- curer toial staff. they'll be able to talk with
you. we can discuss how the objects, where they came from, how they were collected. but most importantly, we want you to connect with the objects, by giving you this intimate look, to allow you to be your own curator, to remember what happened on that day, as each passing year goes by, we're farther and farther away from what actually happened. we're hoping this helps people connect with what happened on september 11, 2001. >> what you're seeing is just a small part of the september 11 collection at the smithsonian. we're talking to the curator of the national september 11 collection, cedric yeh. mr. yeh, thanks for your time. >> sunday marks the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks and c-span will take you live to the white house at 8:30 a.m. eastern as president obama observes a moment of silence. then we're live from new york city for the ceremony at the national september 11 memorial in lower manhattan. at 9:30 eastern, remarks from
president obama at the pentagon's ceremony. and at 10:00 eastern, live coverage from shanksville, pennsylvania, of a commemoration at the flight 93 national memorial. 9/11 events live this sunday morning starting at 8:30 eastern here on c-span, also on the c-span radio app and at cspan.org. earlier today, house speaker paul ryan and house minority leader nancy pelosi spoke at the u.s. capitol to mark the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks. this is about 15 minutes.
speaker ryan: good morning. standing here, recalling that ay, here today, i can't help think of my own children. and all the children born in this country after 9/11. do they fully understand what happened that day? will they ever, can they? they can watch the old footage, hey can see the clips of the
towers falling. they can hear the great roar as a landmark comes crashing down and with it an era. can they actually feel it? i've had so many conversations with my own kids about this. about the shock, the terror, the outrage. can they feel the sense of loss and bereavement at losing 3,000 americans in a single morning? i don't think they can. ut that makes it our generation's burden. we lived through that terrible day. and we will never forget that terrible day. today, though, we are not here to relive that tragedy. we are here to remember it and to honor its memory. none of us would ever choose to go through that day again but all of us must choose what it is we take away from it.
i think of the firefighters. the people who went rushing into danger when the whole world was running away from it. i remember you couldn't get a light just driving home. i remember all those flags appearing on overpasses throughout all of this country. as if these flags suddenly appeared to bind up a nation's wounds. these are the stories we can pass on. we can turn our burden of grief o a gift of grace. because our children may not fully understand the horror of it all, but they can admire the heroism. that is how all of them and all of us can mark this anniversary. we can tell the stories. we need to tell the stories. we need to pray for the fallen. and in this small but
meaningful way, we can begin to understand the pain and the promise of this great nation. ms. pelosi: 15 years ago, we suffered a tragedy we could not have ever imagined and witnessed heroism that we will never forget. every september 11 for the past 15 years, americans have boud their heads to find comfort in faith. even as we are still rocked by disbelief at the tragedy of that day. s we humbly visit the sacred ground of 9/11 this year, we continue to marvel at the heroism of the first responders and the families who turned their grief into action to make america safer. because of them, 9/11 does not belong to fear.
it belongs to courage. it belongs to compassion. it belongs to the first responders and those who rushed into the smoke and up the stairs to the passengers who charged up the aisle, to the men and women who stayed behind in the stricken buildings to help strangers to safety. because of them, out of the ashes of the fallen world trade center, the crushed concrete of the pentagon, and a burning field in pennsylvania, americans rose united. as we salute all of those who died on 9/11, we must also salute those who have lost their lives in the years since. we must remember the ongoing struggles of the thousands of heroes who, years later, are stalked by devastating illnesses from their exposure to ground zero. by some accounts, 10 to 15 cancer diagnoses per week. 15 years later.
we must treat all of them and those who will come after as illnesses in our own families. we must continue to meet our commitment to the health and ompensation needs of our heroes and their loved ones. we will remember and our prayers, comfort, and appreciation must exist for as long as our country shall exist. this is the legacy of 9/11 that we must pass down through the generations. the heroism and the resilience that are the soul of our nation. let the memory of our fallen heroes be a blessing to their beloved and to our nation. let their sacrifice continue to deepen our dedication to justice and to freedom. may god bless the fallen men and women of 9/11 and their families, and may god continue to bless the united states of america.
>> let us pray. god of heaven and earth, we give you thanks for giving us another day. chaplain conroy: today we remember a day begun in terror nd violence and ended in heroic effort and courage. we mourn those whose lives were snatched from them, give peace and healing to those who mourn the loss of their loved ones still. we thank you again for the almost universal international response to a great american tragedy. all your children of good will could see the horrors of actions by men who would presume to act in your name, causing so much death and destruction. may your spirit of peace and
justice continue to fill the hearts of people of all faiths, races, and nations. be present with us this day as we gather again on our capitol's steps. bless the men and women who serve this great nation in the house of representatives. may they be confident in the knowledge that all americans stand behind them in their common effort to forge legislation that will reflect the resilient greatness of our nation. ay all that is done this day and in the many days to come be for your greater honor and glory, amen. speaker ryan: at this time, i'd like to invite everyone to participate in a moment of silence.
>> after the remembrance ceremony, taking place on the stepts of the u.s. capitol, several members tweeted out pictures of the event as they marked the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. indiana congresswoman jackie walorski tweeting -- >> virginia representative don beyer whose district includes the pentagon and arlington said -- >> and here's a couple more with pictures from fellow
members. >> if you missed today's ceremony, we'll be showing it to you again tonight at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. on sunday, several more 9/11 events on the 15th anniversary as we take you live to the white house at 8:30 a.m. eastern, as president obama observes a moment of silence. then we're live from new york city for the ceremony at the national september 11 memorial in lower manhattan. at 9:30 eastern, it's remarks from president obama at the pentagon ceremony. and at 10:00, live coverage from shanksville, pennsylvania, of a commemoration at the flight 93 national memorial. 9/11 events live sunday morning starting at 8:30 eastern here on c-span, on the c-span radio app, and at cspan.org. >> c-span's "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that
impact you. and coming up saturday morning, washington examiner commentary writer and associate editor for the nation will join us to talk about the latest campaign 2016 developments. then the center for strategic and international studies will talk about the united states' recent $1.3 billion in payments to iran to settle an unresolved arms deal after the initial $400 million payout. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal" beginning live at 7:00 eastern saturday morning. join the discussion. >> for campaign 2016, c-span continues on the road to the white house. >> we are going to get things done, big things. that's who we are as americans. >> we will have one great american future. our potential is unlimited. >> ahead, live coverage at the presidential and vice presidential debates on c-span. the c-span radio app.
and cspan.org. monday, september 26, is the first presidential debate. live from new york. then on tuesday, october 4, vice presidential candidates, governor mike pence, and senator tim kaine, debate at longwood university in farmville, virginia. and on sunday, october 9, washington university in st. louis hosts the second presidential debate. leading up to the third and final debate between hillary clinton and donald trump, taking place at the university of nevada-las vegas on october 19. live coverage of the presidential and vice presidential debates on c-span. listen live on the free c-span radio app. or watch live or any time n-demand at cspan.org. >> earlier today on capitol hill, house appropriations committee chair hal rogers spoke to reporters on funding the government past september 30. he said republicans are considering an option to fund the government until mid december to avoid a shutdown.
here's a look at his comments. mr. rodgers: i want to see us go to the middle of december, to give us a chance to try to put together passable omnibuses , to try to enact as many of the appropriations bills that we've run through the committee as possible. because that's really the power of the purse. that is the congress deciding how moneys are spent or not spent by the administration. that's the essential power of the purse. we do a c.r. until march, you're punting on the power of the purse. you're running the white flag saying, administration, you see the money as you see fit, not as we see fit reporter: nothing's been agreed to but any chance it might move next week? the idea that you can try to jam the senate and move more expeditiously and maximize your leverage from this side? mr. rodgers: well, i'll leave that kind of a decision to the
leadership on the house and senate side. reporter: would you be in favor of that if you could maximize your leverage? mr. rodgers: in favor of what? reporter: doing something more quickly here. hen you're in control. mr. rogers: that's the leadership. reporter: is the number going to stay at 107 or could you try to come down? mr. rogers: the c.r. has a funding level consistent with the previous year. reporter: we will still be at $106.7 at that point? you fully anticipate whenever we get to the longer bill, to go to $107 per the boehner agreement from last october? mr. rogers: that's correct. reporter: do you think the argument's going to win the day here? short-term c.r.? mr. rogers: i think so. reporter: why? mr. rogers: we had a good reception here today.
i think. on the idea of a short term. particularly by the people who believe in strong military. a c.r. until march would do severe damage to our military capabilities. that's paramount. so i think for that reason, among others, we will see a short term. reporter: how do you deal with democrats mistrusting this idea because it might not pass all the bills? i spoke with marcy capture, she marcy capture, -- kaptur, she brought up, are they going to do all of the bills? mr. rogers: there's a realization within the conference that an omnibus is likely out of the question. it's not a very popular thing. i don't like it either. so the idea is to try to do a few mini buses that are
bite-sized appropriations. that we can digest and look at carefully. sweel how that works out. it's all a matter of negotiation. reporter: zika. is that in the c.r.? mr. rogers: i think so. reporter: do you feel comfortable, if we run into a situation where a large number of conservatives are unwilling to vote for the short-term c.r. that goes into december, are you comfortable having that passed with the support of democrats and a small number of republicans? mr. rogers: of course i want to . e our caucus go 100% [inaudible] nevertheless, the bottom line is to pass a c.r. until the middle of december. to give us a chance to negotiate omnibuses. reporter: how is the fight this year compared to what we usually get with three weeks out, two weeks out, before the
end of the fiscal year? compare this to other years. mr. rogers: i think this time an omnibus is a very unpopular word. so that's not been necessarily the case in the past. i think the sentiment is to do mini buses and to do them as quickly as we can. reporter: do you -- i mean, characterize this compared to the challenge that we get sometimes every september around this place. mr. rogers: it's a lot like the previous years, i expect. reporter: consensus on it but no final decision? the c.r. and minibus. mr. rogers: on a short term. reporter: short term plus minibuses, that's the consensus of the congress? mr. rogers: i think so. reporter: -- [inaudible] -- lame duck, is that what you're saying? minibuses in the lake dumb. mr. rogers: yes. reporter: -- [inaudible] -- move ahead with a short-term spending bill and minibuses?
is the leadership ready to go forward with what you're discussing, a short-term spending bill and a minibus? mr. rogers: they haven't said that specifically but i think that's where they are. reporter: the minibuses would be after the election and the c.r. would be for the entire government through december 9, is that the understanding? mr. rogers: the exact date is not decided on the house side. otherwise, you're correct. [inaudible] reporter: you prefer the 16th of december? rodge wrong i would like to have -- mr. rogers: i would like to have. reporter: isn't the concern if the date is the 9th, it really becomes the 16th and really we et this done about the 22nd? what are your christmas plans? reporter: do you know what minibuses might move forward? might you prioritize defense or homeland or is that yet to be decided? mr. rogers: it's yet to be decided. reporter: do you expect the house will be able to pass the senate's original $1.1 billion for zika that's not offset?
mr. rogers: that's under consideration. i'd rather not publicly that the point in time speculate. reporter: do you have a preference? mr. rogers: i do. reporter: would you be willing to share that? [laughter] reporter: [inaudible] -- would you be ok with passing it through the short-term c.r. as we talked about? mr. rogers: which bill? reporter: clean $1.1 billion zika funding bill. couple florida republicans filed it last night. mr. rogers: i haven't had a chance to read it. reporter: you know what it is. it's the same level that you supported and that the senate passed without some of the riders on it. mr. rogers: what about offsets? reporter: it doesn't have offsets. mr. rogers: i'd rather not speculate. i haven't seen it. reporter: thank you. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] >> the congressional agenda was also discussed on the floor earlier today by house leaders kevin mccarthy and steny hoyer. they spoke about funding the government past september 30. but focused most of their comments on bills to fund zika
research. their comments are about 35 minutes. majority leader, mr. mccarthy. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. on monday, the house will meet at noon for morning hour and 2:00 p.m. for legislative business. votes will be postponed until 6:30. on tuesday and wednesday will meet at 10:00 a.m. and noon for legislative business. on thursday, the house will meet at 9:00 a.m. for legislative business. on friday, the house is not in session. a complete list of suspensions will be announced by close of business today. the house will consider h.r. 3590, the halt tax increase on the middle class and seniors act represented by martha mcsally and will prevent americans with high health care costs facing an additional tax increase. h.r. 5520 v.a.'s modernization
act sponsored by representative jeff miller which ensures that employees at the department of veterans affairs are held accountable from misconduct for poor performance. this bill will modernize the disability apeoples process to reduce the unacceptable backlog of claims. the house will consider h.r. 5226 the regulatory integrity act sponsored by representative walberg which requires agencies to publish proposed regulations on their website. the house will consider h.r. 5355 sponsored by representative jackie walorski which prevents the transfer of any individuals detained at guantanamo bay, cuba. i thank the gentleman and i yield back.
mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for that schedule. i won't discuss any of the bills the gentleman mentioned on the schedule, but i do want to note a couple of absences. one was the continuing resolution. as the gentleman knows after next week, the c.r. is not included, we have nine legislative days left before the scheduled adjournment. as the gentleman knows we have not passed a single appropriation bill and without finding fault with either side because i know each side thinks the other is at fault, we have not passed a single appropriation bill. so there is no alternative to a continuing resolution and we must pass the continuing resolution if the government is going to be operating on october 1 in the new fiscal year. the limited number of days in session, nine days after next
week, there are reports that the house republicans are divided on how long the c.r. ought to be. whether or not we ought to go into the 115th congress or not. representative tom cole was quoted as saying since we are all drawing our checks, we ought to do our job and get it done, meaning the appropriations rocess and continuing with his quote, and recognize that the next administration and the next congress are going to have to have plenty to do and deal with on their own and not throw additional work at them because we are either too lazy or incompetent to do our work. that's representative tom cole, one of the senior members of this body, former chairman of the campaign committee and respected member of this body.
mr. leader, i believe we ought to pass a c.r. as soon as possible, consider it as soon as possible. my own belief is it ought to be short-term. i believe many people share that view. apparently senator mcconnell shares that view as well and my understanding that the senate is going to consider such a c.r. and send it to us. it is our responsibility under the constitution to move on pieces of legislation. they may amend theirs into a house bill which both sides do from time to time. but can you tell me, a, how long do you expect the c.r.? first of all, when do you believe we will consider a ontinuing resolution to fund the government past september 30. and how long will the c.r. extend?
and thirdly as we did last year, is it your expectation that we will do an omnibus in december in the lame duck? and i yield to my friend. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. surely, the gentleman did not mean from the point that no appropriation bills have passed this floor, because six have passed, but they haven't been -- mr. hoyer: reclaiming my time. as the gentleman and i both know, no appropriation bills have been enacted. and as i pointed out. for getting about who's to blame and you and i have different perspectives on that. they haven't been passed and signed by the president. haven't been passed by the congress and the president hasn't signed any. there isn't any possibility we are going to pass one or more of those bills. there are 12 appropriation bills
to fund government. doesn't look like we are going to pass any of them. and we will need a c.r. my question relates to the c.r., on those points. and i yield to the gentleman. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for clarifying. and one more clarification, if the gentleman may. all 12 of the bills of appropriations have passed out of committee. so it is our desire to finish that work. yes, it looks as though we will be into a continuing resolution. we have funding up to september 30 and it is our intent to have that done. we will not depart without finishing that work. the duration of the time is up for discussion and we have been having discussions on both sides of the aisle about that. but as soon as that decision is made, members will be advised when the floor action is scheduled. i assure the gentleman it will be done before any nem has departed. i yield back.
mr. hoyer: i presume that. i presume that the majority and i will say this, but whatever is in and your party control both of the house and of the senate. yes we have the presidency, but no bills have reached his desk. whether they gone out of committee or not, no bills have reached his desk. getting out of committee means nothing. nothing happens because it gets out of committee other than it's eligible to come to the floor. beyond that, nothing happens with respect to funding the government. not a question of blame, but no bill has passed from the congress to the president of the united states for signature. he hasn't vetoed any bills because they haven't gotten to him. so we need to adopt a c.r. i think the gentleman is correct
that we aren't going to go home i presume without passing a c.r. the government will shut down for 16 days some years ago because we wouldn't repeal the affordable care act. i don't presume that's going to happen this time. but i certainly hope that we address the c.r. it's not scheduled for next week. discuss another subject in just a second that should have been scheduled in my view this week. we did bills that frankly aren't going to be passed or sent to the president. we spent a full week otherwise known as 25% of the time scheduled for us to be here before the electric. next week will make it 50% of the time and still no c.r. has been brought forward. and we left town in july without
assing the senate bill, passed 68-30, a bipartisan bill to address the critical health crisis confronting the american people, zika. you don't schedule that for next week either on your schedule, mr. leader. and i'm very concerned. i think america is very concerned, certainly on this side of the aisle we are very concerned and i want to make a representation here publicly so that america will know and you will know that i'm prepared to ourthat almost everybody in unanimous, ld say but i haven't talked to everybody, to pass the bipartisan senate bill. passed 68-30, which would appropriate $1.1 billion.
tony fauci, who is the director and i.h. allergies infectious disease which falls under his authority and he said as of october 1, he is going to have no money for the development of a vaccine. the gentleman is as concerned as i am because we talked about setting up funds for disasters. this is a health crisis, obviously a disaster and let me ask the gentleman if he expects zika funding to come to the c.r. or asr with the a separate bill. and again i represent to him, i believe every democrat and i haven't talked to every democrat, but i believe every democrat will support the bipartisan senate bill passed
68-30, which properties money nd has the virtue unlike the conference report, which the house added poison pill language that they knew needed that the democrats would support with the house and the senate, undermining frankly, the ability to have health services delivered in puerto rico, the epicenter of the zika crisis and should have been no surprise that that was not going to be supported and the president made it clear he wasn't to support it. we need to reach a compromise. i urge the majority leader to address this and bring it to the floor. and i tell him he will have my full support and engagement for the senate bill, which was a bipartisan bill and i yield to my friend to let us know when he expects to deal with this critical health crisis
confronting the american people and i yield. . mr. mccarthy: before this cry suss you and i sat -- crisis you and i sat together. before this crisis you and i compiled a group of members on both sides of the aisle with the experts to deal with it. $600 million quickly went out the door to fight, to combat. the senate approved $1.1 billion. i'm somewhat excited to hear all the democrats will change their mind now and vote for the bill. i would like to remind the gentleman that in june this house took up this issue because we know what would happen in the summer. we know what's transpiring in florida because we predicted it would because it was already happening in puerto rico, but
that was not the case on this floor that night. everyone on the other side said no. well, you know what, in the senate they've taken this up three times. your side of the aisle decided to leave without dealing with this issue. they could have dealt with this issue this week. this is the exact amount of money that the president or the senate voted for unanimously over there. maybe not unanimously but bipartisan. this is not one to play politics with. we did our job here. it's quite ironic on a clarification on your past one saying republicans are in the majority here. yes, that's true. and you saw that happen. the rules in the senate are much different, which it empowers the minority to stop. that's why we're talking about a c.r., but this should not be the case. you could have challenged your colleagues in that senate on
your party to stop the filibuster. the people should not have to wait. we've been in those rooms together. i know your desire. when you and i talked about putting the emergency funding together, you know what, that's in the appropriations this ear. we need this to get done. they need the money. we need to combat it, and we need to monitor it. that's why we dealt with this in june. the frustration i have, even when we came back this week, the senate democrats were in the exact same place before. this money goes to the community centers in puerto rico exactly as the president requested. it's not a time to play politics. it's not a time to get frustrated about a different issue that you had that night so you couldn't vote yes. that's the truth behind this and that's wrong. yield back.
mr. hoyer: i could get very animated in my answer. the fact of the matter what the majority leader represents, in my view, is inaccurate. the senate sent us a bipartisan ill. and because you think you needed to serve some of your most hardlined members, you made it a political bill and we were not going to take it. we're not going to eyou eliminate planned parenthood -- to see you eliminate planned parenthood. listen to me, mr. majority leader. i listened to you respectfully. eliminate planned parenthood's services and funding to deliver services in puerto rico, the epicenter of this disease. and you put other legislation in that bill you knew was
unacceptable to us. the senate did not do that because they need 60 votes which means they need to come to a bipartisan agreement. you rejected a bipartisan agreement on your side of the aisle. mr. speaker, i will address -- the speaker pro tempore: address your remarks to the chair. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, the majority party rejected the bipartisan legislation that came from the senate with 68 votes. that's more than 2/3 of the senate. half of the republicans in the united states senate. passed that bill over to us, and we could have passed it. notwithstanding -- i know they say we needed the $1.9 billion. had you brought that bill to the floor without adding political aspects to it that you knew we would not support, it would have passed. you could have passed it on your own but you chose to make it a political bill, and we're
not going to accept that because the american -- you are right, mr. leader. mr. speaker, the american people deserve that we deal with this issue now. the president asked for this oney on february 22. we're now september 10. mr. speaker, we have not dealt ith this, except in a way that frankly the majority party knew would not be acceptable, would not be bipartisan, would not pass the senate and would not be signed by the president. and it is, i say with all due respect, mr. majority leader, not credible to say we didn't take because -- what you wanted to jam down our throat -- i know some people on my side oh, $1.1 billion is not enough. i don't believe it's not enough. but it's a very substantial sum
for n.i.h. to pursue vaccines and pursue other matters in puerto rico and florida and other places in this nation to keep our people safe. so i tell the majority leader again, bring the bipartisan bill passed to us by the united states senate with 68 votes, a g it to the floor as house bill and we'll pass it and that's why i tell the majority leader, mr. speaker, that i believe every member on my side of the aisle will vote for that, not because they believe $1.1 billion will be sufficient to address this problem and leader pelosi makes the point, mr. speaker, the director of c.d.c. says that it will cost $10 million per child who suffers from microcephaly, which is the result of zika and very frankly in brazil they
found the results go beyond that. $10 million. if 200 children get microcephaly, that gets to the dollars that the president ants from us to prevent this horrible consequence to the children and to the families of america. so i say with all due respect, mr. majority leader, you can say all you want and i know the spin. the democrats in the senate are holding this up. i do not accept that. i think it is inaccurate. what is holding it up is putting in items in a bill that is absolutely essential, grew tuesday tussly that you -- gra tuesdaytiesly that you know we will object to. what the senate did was reached a bipartisan agreement. very tough to reach bipartisan agreements in this house because we have a group in this house that wants to wag the dog
. and that's not what the american people expect. and i want to say, mr. speaker, i have great respect for the majority leader. he's accurate, we do sit down, we do work together and we can come to bipartisan agreements. we didn't sit down on this. the conference committee was not signed by a single democrat. there was no doubt that when it came to this house floor there were no democrats on that conference report and we had no debate. one of the reasons we had no debate, i want to make it clear, because majority leader, mr. speaker, is going to make that clear. our side, we thought there was another important issue, but the fact of the matter is not whether it was debated, there would have been 30 minutes on each side. short debate. but the fact of the matter is the majority leader knows that the $1.1 billion bill that the senate passed, even though it's
not the president's request, would have passed on this floor. and it would pass on this floor today. and n.i.h. and c.d.c. would have the resources, mr. speaker, that it needs to protect the american people. and that, mr. speaker, is with a we should do and i now yield, mr. speaker, to the majority leader. cathy lanier well, i thank the gentleman. i think the best thing for the american people is actually read the bill. so let me just read the section that you referred to that you stated that no democrats in aprops would sign onto and that they wanted to vote -- referred to a block grant. this is dealing for zika. for the funding of health services provided by public health departments, hospitals are reimbursed through public health plans. seriously? you're opposed to that?
that's what you're fighting over? why people every day and the mosquitoes begin to grow and go beyond state by state, this is what we're fighting over? that $1.1 billion added with the other $600 million took place in june. yeah, we couldn't get to the floor to debate it because you wouldn't give us one microphone. but i'm sorry. i know there's a lot of political that goes around here but this is not. this is the moment, this is the time that we rise above it. the american people do not deserve that. and i say let's put this paragraph out. let the public read what the bill says and i will promise you the majority wants you to vote for it and stop playing games. i yield back. mr. hoyer: i understand the majority wants to vote for what they want us to vote for. they don't want to reach a -- mr. mccarthy: you voted against that. mr. hoyer: i did vote against that. cathy lanier if the gentleman
-- the speaker pro tempore: direct your remarks to the -- -- direct your remarks to the chair. mr. hoyer: it's so hard, mr. speaker. mr. mccarthy: if the gentleman will yield? mr. hoyer: i will be happy to yield but i have a comment. mr. mccarthy: mr. speaker, the gentleman across the aisle is true, we work together and on big issues we try to find common ground. in that spirit, will you tell me what in that paragraph you disagree with? mr. hoyer: reclaiming my time, mr. speaker. is the gentleman aware that the major deliverer of health services to women in puerto rico is through planned parenthood? is the gentleman aware of that? mr. mccarthy: yielding? mr. hoyer: i yield. mr. mccarthy: did the president request when he requested money that it get delivered that way? in here -- may i remind the gentleman what i am requesting?
the funding goes for health services provided by public health departments, hospitals are reimbursed through public health plan. public health means that's the way the health care is provided, so we are funding the entities that provide the health care. exactly when the president had requested. mr. hoyer: that language -- reclaiming my time, mr. speaker -- was clearly designed as the gentleman knows, as the staff knows and has been publicized to preclude one of the agencies that delivers health care in had puerto rico from doing so. and that's planned parenthood that gets public funds. this is designed, we believe, to restrict it. but let's put that aside. let's say we have a disagreement on that. let's accept that. what the senate said, if we have disagreements on these things, we're going to pass a bill that gets that money out
the door, and they passed it 68-30, which means approximately 1/2 of the republicans voted for it because -- and very frankly, a predecessor of yours, mr. blunt, was a co-sponsor of that bill. one of my very close friends, as you know, along with ms. murray. so they achieved the objective in the united states senate of doing exactly what i think you are actually correct, mr. speaker, in saying and that is that the people want us to act. it's not on the schedule this week. it's not on the schedule next week. . and it ought to be on the schedule and both you and i could say that yes, our sides can support this. without, we have some very significant differences, mr. speaker.
we all understand that. the american people understand that. and we ought not to try to deal with those as something as critically important. that's what the senate decided to do and senator blunt and senator murray decided to do and 68 members of the senate decided to do. now, just for the sake argument that we have a disagreement on the interpretation of what that does, but if we have a disagreement, that means that we're not able to pass that bill. you may disagree with our reasoning, but that's the fact. and that's what the conclusion of the united states senate came to, mr. speaker. so they did a bill they could agree on in a bipartisan way. i tell you, mr. speaker, i will reiterate once again, bring the senate bill. this is a blunt-murray bill. mr. blunt, the former majority leader and minority whip and
majority whip. senator from missouri. republican leader in the senate sent us a bipartisan bill. let's take that bill and whatever other differences we have, let's debate them, mr. speaker. those provisions can be brought to the floor separately and apart without undermining the need to immediately fund the zika public health efforts. i again say to my friend, those two issues -- i might also add perhaps in closing that we ought to be dealing with flint as well, another public health issue that has been pending for over a year. i will yield to my friend. mr. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman for yielding. the only thing i want to clarify here is you believe in debate
and have the opportunity for people to air different sides? mr. hoyer: i do. we are asking mr. king's bill to be brought to the floor, so i do believe in that. mr. mccarthy: if the gentleman would yield, i ask the gentleman to join with me requesting that the democrats in the senate, the filibuster denied the bill to come up for debate. so would you not join me in asking the democrats to stop playing politics with the filibuster and allow the bill to come up? if the bill fails, the bill fails. you were always so go with reading articles and i don't know if i ever read one to you but i would like to. if you will indulge, a little fact. this is the organization that looks at what we say and tries
to put truth to it. this is the headline. democrats stretch impact of planned parenthood inclusion in the zika bill. this is one highlight. the bill also provides -- provided funds that would potentially help clinic and hospitals in nearly every municipality on the island. could we not agree that that is more important than politics? could we not agree that people are being affected every day and that those who are watching this debate shake their head and wonder why we are even having this fight. in june, we passed the bill. since that time, democrats in the senate will not even allow it to be debated. not even allow to be debated to vote it up or vote it down. one thing americans believe in,
fairness. and i don't believe that that's fairness if you deny a bill from coming forward. if you deny the bill from coming forward, you are blocking it. if you want the true definition of what is happening in this zika battle is those on the other side of the aisle in the senate are blocking discussion from even taking place. mr. hoyer: they aren't blocking anything, they passed a bill 68-30. they sent it here. and it was blocked from coming to the floor. and it would have passed. if you believe, as you asked me do i believe, should we consider things, the answer of course is yes. and i said peter king, the former chairman of the homeland security committee has a bill -- two bills that are supported by over 85% of the american public. bring them to the floor, mr. leader, on the premise that we
ought to debate, consider and vote. bring them to the floor. bring mr. king's bills to the floor. bring the senate bill. you know the senate bill has 68 votes. and i will tell you, mr. speaker, i will tell the majority leader that had he brought the senate bill to the floor, we were precluded from voting on the senate bill, mr. speaker. majority leader just said we ought to bring the bill to the floor. isn't it the right thing to do. if it's right for the senate and we can control the house and i was the majority leader and i could decide to bring bills to the floor or not bring them to the floor. the majority leader has that authority. bring the senate bill to the floor. if, in fact, as the majority leader just said, we ought to have debate, consider it, if it
goes down, fine. if it passes, that's the will. if that is a good premise in the senate, it's even a better premise in the house of representatives. and so, mr. speaker, i ask my friend, the majority leader to bring that bill to the floor. let's vote on it. that's what he said his premise was and what we were committed to, and i agree with him. i don't like the filibuster or the 60-vote rule in the senate. the 60-vote rule undermines democracy. if a bill has 50% and the committee reports it out, it ought to come to the floor. i agree with the majority leader on that. -- eed and i had that discussions on that. if it's good for the senate and it's good for the house. the majority can rule in this
house. and if he brings that bill to the floor, it will pass. it will pass on monday. i guarantee the gentleman. and i know we need to conclude -- so in all consideration explaining to me the schedule. but this is serious. and i don't say this lightly. the majority leader and i do work together. let's pass the zika bill and then have arguments on stuff we don't agree on. we do agree on the senate bill, at least at least how it goes. you stripped the confederate flag amendment from the conference report, the milcon bill, because you didn't want your guys to vote on it. that's why it was done. i didn't like that, but it passed the house. stripped out of the bill. not by the senate, but the
house. but that's an aside. that's an aside, because you are right, the majority leader is right, doesn't affect zika. hat affects zika is $1.1 billion. and if the majority leader brings it to the floor, we could pass it on suspension. mr. speaker, i appreciate the majority leader's discussion on this matter. we have some critical issues, mr. speaker, that we need to deal with. funding government, getting zika passed, helping the people in flint, funding opioids. we passed it in a bipartisan way, but we didn't fund it. another health crisis. we need to address these critical matters. these bills have merit -- these other bills have merit but not a
>> here's a look at our primetime schedule on the c-span networks. n c-span, house members marked the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. and on c-span 3, a house hearing reviews current mental health are access and challenges. >> c-span's "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. and coming up saturday morning, "washington examiner" commentary will join us. then anthony cordesman will talk
about the payment to iran to settle an unresolved arms deal after the initial $400 million payout be sure to watch "washington journal" beginning live at 7:00 eastern on saturday morning. join the discussion. >> sunday marks the 15th anniversary of september 11 and c-span's live coverage of the day's events begins at 7:00 a.m. eastern during "washington journal" where you can join the conversation about 9/11. then we are live from new york city for the ceremony at the national september 11 memorial. then the september 11 ceremony at the pentagon with remarks from president obama. then at 10:00, we'll be at the memorial at the flight 93 national memorial. the 15th anniversary of september 11 on c-span, the c-span radio app and c-span.org.
this weekend on american history tv, we look back 15 years to the september 11 terrorist attacks through stories of americans who were at the white house, the u.s. capitol, the pentagon and in the skies above washington, d.c. on saturday at noon eastern, we'll hear from john jester, former chief of the pentagon protection service, mary cahill, and mary madeleine, former aid to dick cheney. >> even before the second plane hit, i went down to the vice president's office a floor below mine, took the stairs down, check my gut. and it was -- i was there when the second plane hit and we knew instantly that this is not an accident. it was some kind of act of terror. >> on sunday, u.s. navy rear admiral david thomas, former senate majority leader tom daschle, gary walters, former
white house chief usher, and major heather petty, former f-16 pie rot. >> the aircraft, flight 93 is not in the near vicinity and able to prosecute an attack at that point in time. we need to get back and make sure we can play the short game now that we cleared out the air space. so when we returned back to d.c., that was when things began to, i mean, on one hand settle down because we never, you know, light 93 wasn't there. and as we discovered later, the passengers on that flight were truly heroes. >> and sunday evening at 6:00 on "american artifacts" we tour the visitor's center of the flight 93 memorial, the final resting place of 40 passengers and crew whose actions prevented al qaeda from crashing their plane into
its likely target, the u.s. capitol building. >> flight 93 national memorial represents a lot about what makes america a fantastic country. in that on september 11, 2001, the people that were on board flight 93 were everyday, ordinary people, citizens of the globe, even. and it shows that you can make a difference, no matter how big or how small and no matter where you're at. >> for our complete american history tv schedule, go to c-span.org. >> for the next hour and 40 minutes a book tv exclusive, our cities tour visits denver, colorado. to learn more about its unique history and literary life. for five years now we've traveled to u.s. cities bringing the book scene to our viewers. watch more of our visits at
c-span.org/citiestour. >> this is downtown denver, colorado's capital city. >> definitely changed when i come back and visit it. >> and this is john murray, the city hall reporter for "the denver post." while we were in town on our c-span cities tour he took a ride in our local content vehicle to talk about denver's history and how it changed into he place we see today. never been here before. and someone like me has never been to denver to give me a gives me a sense of the city. john: denver is a city that was that in the last 30 years it has been a western city, western city on the rise. for the last 30 years or so.
so growth has been the biggest dynamic here. >> what is denver's economic makeup here? john: denver is going through a lot of economic change where the gap is widening because it's growing so quickly. affordability is a huge issue here. the people who make really good salaries are living very comfortably. the people who are maybe middle class and below, they are struggling to keep up with their property taxes and rents that are going up rather quickly. so that's pricing some people out of the city. it's kind of the dynamic of teachers and firefighters and some of those middle class employees are finding it harder to stay in denver so they're moving to suburbs. so denver has added 80,000 people in five years. so it's just growing very quickly. >> what is bringing people here? >> it is a strong economy and the quality of life.
any people here who moved here the last few years. >> tell me about the neighborhood we're getting ready to head into. >> we're heading into one of the parts of denver that has changed the most and had the most money invested in the last 10 or 15 years. it's the valley, it includes lower downtown and the river front area and then union station. which just reopened a couple of years ago after a $500 million new transit center. it was kind of an underground bus center, new rail lines going in. some are open, some will be opening in the next couple years. then there's also been $1 billion of new building going on around it. there's a whole new neighborhood that's been coming up around union station. >> what was it like previously versus what it's like now? >> 25 years ago, 30 years ago, that whole area was a big rail
yard. they consolidated rail lines down to make space and then all has tuff around here gotten redeveloped into fashionable neighborhoods. >> so who live here's? give me a picture of who spends time in this neighborhood? >> this is millenial central. it's not all millenials, millenials with college educations and good-paying jobs because it's a -- it's an expensive neighborhood. then probably some empty nesters and some baby boomers who are more retirement age and want to live downtown. they're putting up some condos, mostly apartment, but they're high-priced apartments. >> how is that changing the look of denver? it's a beautiful city. the rocky mountains in the backdrop, how is that kind of changing aesthetically from, i see some warehouses over here. >> the skyline is expanding for sure. it's making central denver into
a much more urban place. there are new mass transit lines opening. light rail lines, heavy rail lines, out to the airport that starts over here. just opened in the last few months. all these changes are giving denver a much more urban character and more urban feel. >> give me the downside of it. what's the downside of living in denver? >> the downside is if you're renting an apartment, your don't know how much your rent is going to be going up at the end of the lease. i've just been through that myself. my rent went up double digits, percentage wise. that's hard to deal with when your salary is not going up that much. >> the cost of living is rising but what you're making isn't. >> it's like the rofse the country, the wages aren't shooting up very much but cost of living. is denver is a diversifying city. it's also had an interesting
diversity. it's a very -- there are african-american neighborhoods and strongholds. one of them we will be going through that applies to. most of the ethnic diversity has en -- denver has a large latino population. some of the newer neighborhoods that are higher priced are overwhelmingly white. >> i have noticed, it's a beautiful city but i've seen a lot of homelessness here. what's the solution to that? what's the situation? >> that's another big problem here. it's kind of similar to the homelessness dynamic you see in a city like portland or austin or san francisco, where even though denver is known as kind of a cold city, it's not east coast cold. it's more temperate in the winter. you can get by here, except for a few days when it gets really cold. what that means just as we're a draw for millenials and people
on the higher economic rungs of society, it's also an appealing place for the homeless. we get a lot of people who are homeless who move here and quite honestly, people who are moving here who aren't homeless but are lower income and they get here and don't realize how expensive it is and get pushed out on the streets. that's a problem we're grappling with here. you do have that contingent who is younger and homeless because they might have some drug issues, they might be drawn by legal marijuana here. we're still kind of figuring out what that dynamic looks like and how much legal marijuana is affecting that. it does cause some problems but i'd say the city is still prorking on trying to solve those issues. this is phi points. it's historically african-american neighborhood going back to the segregation era. it was the part of denver, when the rest of the city wasn't so
welcoming to african-americans had jazz clubs and social clubs and just strongholds of the black community. denver is -- doesn't have as large a black community as a lot of big cities do. so it was a very close knit community, and still is in many respects. >> what are the holdovers from that sort of old neighborhood? >> there are still some historic buildings up here, there still are quite a few folks who have live here their entire lives. but it is a rapidly changing neighborhood. so as we go up,well see some older buildings and also some newer buildings starting to go in construction. >> what's in five points now? it's a neighborhood in transition, old and new. >> this is the historic five points intersection here. downing and washington. and so you have the mix of old businesses. but then also some new restaurants. some hipster joints because there's a lot of white people who hi in this neighborhood now.
i have african-american friends from high school who moved to five points with a latino husband, they're gentrifiers and people of color, but they're the exception, mostly it's white people moving in. there's some resentment because it's a visible reminder of the change happening. >> if you'd come to five points 20, 30, 40 years ago, what would you have seen here? >> i think you would have seen a neighborhood that was much more african-american, much more culturally proud. it's still culturally proud but more tight. and also about the 1960's, 1970's, they were struggling, with the rest of central denver, economically. >> tell me about that struggle, where was denver and where is it now? >> in the 1970's, 1980's, they were reliant on the oil cycle.
when times were good, they were really good. when they were bad, the economy hit the floor. you had a downtown that was like an office park with lots of parking lots. you had less of an urban downtown area or central denver area. and that, you know, all has changed. >> so you are the city council reporter. you're sort of the government beat here. what are some interesting shifts that you've kind of seen from that standpoint? >> on city council, i think you've seen, we had council elections last year, there was a lot of turnover because we have term limits here. one of the things you did see what was an influx of younger councilmembers. a few who are in their 30's and 40's, whereas it used to be, like any urban city council ends to favor older folks. now you have folk whors
representing a little bit more of the millenial residents here and their points of view. some of them are also on the preservation bandwagon. some of them also are more in favor of marijuana industry and hearing their concerns and trying to balance that with neighborhood concerns. so i think you've seen a loosening on the city council and a liberalizing of attitudes. >> we went under i-70. is there sort of a distinction now? we're officially in a different neighborhood? does it separate this part of town from the other? >> it does. this is an area bisected by the highway. and it's kind of a classic urban story from the mid 1900's, when the highway system was built. it was a very proud, working class neighborhood and then the federal government -- >> like factories. >> yeah. then the federal government built a highway through the middle of it ander to it apart.
it's an area with high home ownership even if it's lower middle class. has very high latino population, spanish-speaking population. you have housing on the right here and then on the left you've got the national western stock show. this is one of the biggest stock shows in the country. >> ok for people like me who live in a city, stock show what do we mean by that? >> like a big state fair. it has a rodeo. it's got -- people come and show cattle from around the country. and there's all kinds of competitions. >> so here in this urban area, you're just going to bring your cattle, show some steer. zever january for a couple of weeks it turns into a massive stock show, draws tons of people. >> what a weird dynamic here. >> and then over here, you've ot sanctuary, that's a big dispensery, a marijuana
production facility. because of zoning requirements, they're in a neighborhood and this is an area where industrial and residential kind of mix. that's been a big problem. there's been a lot of pushback against that up here because the industry is taking over all these spaces. neighborhood advocates feel it's going to constrain neighborhood growth in the future. >> probably people in denver and colorado get sick of being known for, hey, that place where marijuana is legal, but it's kind of fascinating coming from the outside. in d.c. there's some legality there but nothing like you see, when you drive through denver, it's dispensery signs, these are businesses that look like apple store. >> there are more dispenseries in the city of denver than starbucks and mcdonald's combined. on the left this green and gray building is springfield cannabis company. it's a production house for marijuana.
and that -- as we come down , e, we'll turn left on 47th what's interesting, this is the first, they would say victim of neighborhood pushback. there's a dispensery on the first floor. there's a small growth facility on the second floor. when it came up for renewal in the last couple of month, the neighborhood pushed back and contested it and the city agreed with them that it was a bad influence on the area. really? >> that it was constraining development and would hurt the plans for the neighborhood. so they're going to lose their license this next month. they're going to be appealing it. the court is likely challenging that decision but this is the first time the city has done that. and there's been some pushback. one of the big debates right you can only use it
privately, you can't use publicly. some people vimet that. so there's going to be a ballot measure, are we going to have a place for people to go smoke or vape or have edibles, especially tourists. and bars are going to apply to have consumption areas. >> so sort of like the old days, in a restaurant, you'd have smoking and nonsmoking section. >> look at this neighborhood, this is where a lot of industry is going in. neglected by the city and very big discussion. >> so we've been to three different neighborhoods in denver. we've looked at the good and kind of the bad and every city has that. why is kind of -- what's next for denver? where do you see your city? >> denver is kind of, you know, in some ways it's passed the
cusp of being a biggerer, more vibrant city. there's it's a magnet for younger people, young professionals moving here. so in some way it's a success story, as you can see in some neighborhoods, it's got a lot of challenges left. those are the big questions that to face in the next decade or so that will determine whether it becomes, you know, economically equal a city of economic equality or a city that -- where there's a widening gap between the rich and poor. i think denver doesn't want to become san francisco. they would love to have san francisco's vie brandy but doesn't want the giant gulf that exists economically there where people just can't -- whole swaths of people can't afford to live there. so it's a problem a lot of cities are face bug denver is, i think, hoping to put its stamp on those issues and solve them more than any city has. >> our visit to denver continues
with author juan thompson and his book "stories i tell myself," it chronicles life with his father, journalist hunter s. hompson. >> i think public image of hunter is best captured by the fear and loathing character, "fear and loathing in las vegas" character which is really all about drinking way too much, taking way too many, you know, drugs and just being out of control. i would describe hunter thompson as complex. he was brilliant, he was sometimes crazy, he was focused, he was very ambitious. he was given to just eruptions of rage for the, you know, small
provocations. he was a complex man. how would i describe hunter as a arent? um, uninvolved, i would say. and i think there was a few reasons for that. first, you know, he was born in 1936, so when he was growing up, he didn't grow up in an era when fathers were, you know, typically heavily involved with raising the kids. so that was part of it. and second, writing was always -- that was the most important thing to hunter, you know? family was secondary, for sure. not that he didn't, you know, he didn't love me and care about me, but as far as being, like, you know, no, i'm not going to go out tonight and see my friends, i'm going to stay home and hang out with the kids making dinner.
no, that was not him. i've been asked many times why do i call him hunter, and i call my mom sandy. and that's just the way it always was. and i think it's because, you know, when i was a baby and, you know, parents are referring to themselves, for whatever reason he was not going to be dad. and i don't think he wanted my mom to be mom. he wanted to be hunter, so i think that's what, you know, when, you know, little babies, hunter, you know? not dad, hunter. when he would have these, you know, outbursts of rage, it was -- i mean, the primary thing was just the yelling. but, i mean, he could really yell. he had this deep, booming voice, and i think the scariest thing
about him when he was angry is he could be just savage with his words. he didn't, you know, he didn't get physical -- or rarely. is primary tool was to say something really cutting and vicious. and because he was so smart and so perceptive, he knew exactly how to really, you know, just go right to the core of somebody. so that was the worst thing to see. and then, you know, he also threw things. and he didn't throw things at people, but, you know, throwing a plate of food against the wall, you know? high speed? that's pretty damn scary. and i think that was his intent, you know? it was to make us, it was to
ake a point. and to make it clear that he was in control and that, you know, the thing to do was for other people to recognize that and submit. that was the point. and it worked. it worked. it worked with kids, it worked with adults. it was very effective. i was absolutely afraid of him. part of it was i was afraid of the possibility of him getting angry. so if i had a friend over, you know, in the middle of the day -- and hunter slept odd hours. he would sleep until four or five in the afternoon and go to sleep at, i don't know, two or three or something, five or six, i don't know. so during the day, he was asleep. so there was this mandate, be quiet.
do not wake hunter up. and this really wasn't like a or else, it was just implied. it'll be a bad thing. you do not want to, you know, do not wake the sleeping dragon, ou know? and then he would have these outbursts, and, you know, it was, yeah, it was just the possibility of making him that angry was terrifying, you know, to a little kid. and he was a big guy. and he was loud, and, you know, when he was angry, he was really scary. so, yeah, yeah, i was definitely scared of him. and what's funny is that, i mean, he never hit me. he -- i can't think that he really was, like, verbally abusive. he certainly was to other people. but it's funny, that didn't matter, you know?
it was just the possibilities. knowing that he could do that, you know, being afraid that he would do it to me. when i think of hunter being angry, the event that stands out most clearly is one night after my mom and he had been arguing, you know, we're still there in the house, she called the police which was something you just did ot do. she called the police and they ame. and my mom was trying to, she was getting some drawers of clothes from her room to take outside, put them in the car so we could drive away, and he -- i remember him grabbing, you know, grabbing the drawer of clothes from her and, you know, something like, well, you know, you're not going anywhere with that. and it was just such a, just a
cruel thing to do, you know, to, for him to just demand that obedience and to exert so much control. and i just, i just, you know, i was, like, 11 years old, like five feet tall, you know? little, scrawny kid, and i just lost it. i just started screaming at him and, you know, tried to, tried to hit him and the, you know, cop grabbed me and held me ack. i wasn't -- [laughter] i was a little kid. there wasn't anything i could do, but i was just, i just couldn't stand any more. i was just so outraged at what a bastard he was. and that really did set my perception of who he was for, you know, for several years until i was able to realize, all
right, well, that's part of him. it's part of him, but, you know, that's not all there is. i mean, the single biggest issue as watching those fights and just how he treated my mom in the two years or so, you know, between when it, when that tension really erupted and became visible to me to when my mom decided to, you know, move out of the house and start the divorce process. nd then, oddly, that kind of started the beginning of our reconciliation too, because now i no longer lived with him. and i wanted a relationship with him. it was a complicated, a
complicated time. on one hand, you know, i just -- at times i hated him, but he was also my father, and i wanted a relationship. so he would invite me out sometimes, and i'd go out and, you know, spend the night, and we would begin to build that relationship that we hadn't, hat we never had before. and then it took, it took years and years of, you know, going to visit him, and then things would blow up and, you know, be more anger and tension and then try again. there were blow-ups over, it could be tiny things like once i was there, and he noticed that a book was missing from his book shelf, and so he started getting
worked up and hinting that, you know, maybe i had stolen his books. and, i mean, that's just like, like paranoid thinking, you know? and sometimes i just, i'd just get really angry, and i'd yell at him. and then, you know, cool down and start again. but i'm just really grateful that both of us kept trying, you know? we didn't give up. and as i got older, it got easier. i was able to have more distance. it's a whole different thing hen you can choose to be there as opposed to, you know, being in a house where you really don't want to be but there's nowhere you can go.
and knowing that i could, if things get weird, i can just leave, you know? that made it a whole lot easier. and he really, for his part, he really tried to moderate, to suppress, you know, his impulses -- [laughter] when i would visit. at least for, you know, a couple days. the nature of our reconciliation was not, it was not based in alking about it. that was not, that was not the kind of guy he was. that was certainly not his generation or his background. you know, they kept that stuff to themselves. and i think by nature he was not a guy to, you know, talk about, talk about his feelings or particularly wanting to know how anybody else felt. so it was all indirect, which certainly made it complicated. [laughter] because i, you know, my generation is more about, hey, you know, here's how i'm feeling.
let me tell you about it. and he just didn't -- he didn't know what to do with that. so it tended to be more, more indirect. i mean, one of the big things hat i finally realized is that he would try to, you know, show his love and concern -- he wouldn't say it, it would be things like as i was getting ready to, you know, leave, you know, after staying there for a weekend he'd say, you know, here's $200, you know? get some tires. and at first i was like, i don't eed tires, what? and then i, you know, with the elp of some friends began to realize maybe this is -- what he's doing is he's trying to say he loves me in this really ndirect way.
and when i started to consider that, it was like, oh, okay. okay, i can -- it's like a different language. and that really helped a lot once i could start to, to look at a what he was doing and what he was saying in that way. like learning to translate t. i am positive that he felt very guilty about how to, about how he, how he was a father. i think hunter felt guilty about all kinds of things. and, yeah, i think he felt guilty about, about the divorce and about his behavior and, you now, not being around. i mean, one thing he would tell his friends, you know, once i was an adult, he would -- he was so proud that i was, like, you know, had a, had a regular job,
you know, and got married and that i was not, you know, a drug addict or a felon. like, he was so surprised that i seemed pretty normal and well adjusted, you know, in spite of our family growing up. and, yeah, the, you know, the way he behaved. when my son will was born, it added something, something new and good to our relationship. part of it was just seeing him holding this baby, and i would never have thought that hunter thompson would be good with babies, but he really was. i mean, for short periods, you know? i wouldn't, like, ask him to babysit or anything. but he just held, you know, like six-month-old baby just so
gently, and, you know, really focused on him. i thought, wow, that's amazing. and it was also an excuse to see im more often. he really, hunter really did have a connection with my son, you know? again, not that it was, you know, that they would go spend lots of time together, but he really felt a bond there. and it was, i think my son, my son's birth was another thing to draw us closer together. it also helped me to understand how fathers feel about their sons. it helped me to understand that there is this unconditional love
that a father has, you know, for their child. and it's just, it's not -- i mean, it's unconditional. it's not because of anything, it's because, because, you know, for me, because he's my son. when my son was going to be born, the question came up, all right, you know, what do you want to be called? and he was adamant he was not going to be grandpa, you know, granddad, one of that stuff. none of that stuff. i think mostly just out of vanity. he just didn't want that confirmation that, yes, you are 62 or, you know, it's like, you know, you're officially old. so he said he can call me ace. not grandpa, ace. hunter was not happy about getting older.
i mean, he wrote many times that he was surprised that he lived to be 30, and he never expected o live to be 67. i think there were a lot of things he didn't like about it. there was, you know, his really, some of his really good friends were dying. that was very difficult for him. and he was a, he was a vain man, you know? getting older is tough, you know? he wasn't, he wasn't quite as attractive to quite as many younger women as he used to be, you know? and the worst of it though, i think, was the physical, the physical impact which was a combination of age and also, you know, 50 years of drinking and drugs really took its toll on his body.
and it became hard for him to, just to get around, you know, and to be independent and obile. and that was, especially for hunter who was, for whom independence was so important, that was intolerable, to be dependent on other people, you know, for everything, was just intolerable. so in the couple days before hunter died, will and my wife and i had gone up to see him, and we hadn't been able to see him for christmas. we normally went there for christmas. so this was, you know, our post-christmas visit. and there was nothing unusual bout it.
we drove up there, and it appeared to be a pretty normal, you know, a normal visit. there was no indication that he had something, you know, he was planning his suicide that weekend. hat night there was an altercation between his -- yeah, his wife. his second wife at the time and him. and she got upset, he got upset, they were yelling. but it didn't seem, you know, especially noteworthy. i mean, that was kind of normal or hunter. and then she went to bed, my wife and will were asleep, and
then in an offhand way he said, you know, hey, you know, you might want to take some of these silver cups or this little silver jewelry box. and i was like, well, okay. okay. and i didn't really think much of it. now in retrospect, it makes sense he was, he was definitely -- he was definitely thinking it was a possibility. and he had talked about suicide for years and years, so it wasn't -- that wasn't a surprise. and i suppose i should have, you know, i should have heard what he was saying and thought, well, this is kind of unusual. what, you know, what's going on here? ut i didn't. and went to bed, and the next
morning it was a really nice morning. his wife had gone into the, you know, the gym, and we were just all hanging out. my wife and will and hunter and i, he was in the kitchen at his table where he liked to, you know, well, do everything. and it was just a really ow-key, calm feel. my wife and will went off to do some sledding on this nearby hill, and it was unusually alm. but in a really nice way. and then i was in a bedroom doing something, and i heard this, this loud like crack or thump, and i thought, well, you
know, did he drop something? did he throw something? didn't really think much of it. came out of the bedroom, looked over, and he was sitting in this, in a chair at the counter with his chin down on his chest, and he looked like he was asleep. i thought, well, that's kind of odd, you know? called his name, he didn't respond. then started to get worried, you know? has he had a seizure? what's, what's going on here? it never occurred to me that, you know, he had shot himself. there was no blood that i could see. he just looked like he was asleep. and i walked over to him, and then i saw some blood. there was very little hough. when people think of, you know, hear that he shot himself, they imagine, you know, blood
everywhere, and thank god it was nothing like that. very little blood. and once i saw that, then it ll, then it all hit. and i'd say i panicked really. i had this thought going through my head that, my god, it's finally happened. you know? i've been thinking about hunter dying, you know, someday in the future, and i figured it would probably be, you know, be by suicide but in a really abstract way. like sometime in the distant future, you know, i'm going to get a call that he's dead, and he killed himself. but for that to all of a sudden become real right now, it's happened, he's dead, i just lost t. i decided to write the book
because after, after hunter died the coverage in the media really focused on that, that wild man persona, you know? the crazy, crazy drug fiend. and i really, i really had a problem with that because it just neglected, you know, who he was and why, why he was important, you know? he wasn't important because he was, you know, an alcoholic drug fiend. hat's irrelevant really. and so i was trying to figure out what can i, what can i do? and then the idea of a book came to mind, you know? and then what seemed to make ense was to explain who hunter was to me through my, you know, the experience of growing up with him and how our
elationship developed. and i didn't intend my book to be a biography or the last word on, you know, here's the definitive hunter thompson. but it was important to me to show there was more to hunter thompson than just popular onception. >> c-span is in the mile-high city of denver to learn about the city's literary culture. we visited the tattered cover, a bookstore established in 1971 which soon became a denver institution. >> when you talk to folks who work in publishing here or who are writers here or who work in writing in any way, shape or form, 80% of them, it feels like, have worked here, you know? everybody who is involved in letters in denver or has come through tattered cover. >> we've been here about a year, and in our first week we had president jimmy carter visit us,
we've had hillary clinton here, we've had david mccullough to, nathaniel philbrick, lots and lots and lots of authors. >> owning a bookstore has been a dream for most of my working life, and kristin and i had tried a couple of times. we had looked at a couple of different options, and nothing worked out right. so we figured, you know, go big or go home, and tattered cover came into being. the deal was announced at the end of march in 2015, and it was the lead story -- it was the number two story, i think, on all the tv news, it was front page of the "denver post." the next day the "denver post" ran an editorial about what a treasure joyce is and how much she has meant to the life of denver, and then it named kristin and i by name and basically said, don't screw this up. so welcome to denver. so transition process is a two-year process. we started officially july 1 of
015. joyce formally retires july 1, 2017. so we are right now exactly in the middle of it. and it's been incremental. every month we learn a little more, take on a little more responsibility and get involved in different departments of the store til at this point to year end, we're really functioning as full members of the management team here. > this was built inside an old theater that was built in the 1950's and ran for about 20 years or so and then was an abandoned building, and we took it over about 10 years ago and turned it into the next location of the tattered cover. this is the room that we have for our bigger events. we can fit about 200, 220 seated
people. and if there is no presentation and it's just a signing, we snake the line throughout the store and can get as many in here as they want. >> kristin and i come in with, you know, a lot of publishing and book industry experience. i have a very broad perspective, because i've seen industry from a number of angles, and still every day is like taking a sip of water from the fire hose. there's so much to learn, it's such a large, complex organization that we're learning all the time. tattered cover was started by a man named steve cogle in, i think, 1971. joyce bought the store right around the end of 1973. at that time it was a 950-square-foot store, and joyce just is a master bookseller. and the store quickly caught on and expanded, expanded. and in a lot of ways, joyce really invented what has become modern brick and mortar retailing. in fact, if you look at tattered
cover and you'll see in the store the green carpets and sometimes brass fixtures and the dark wood, the original barnes & noble superstores were modeled on this. so we're four locations. we have three large format and one tiny store in union station. and we also, in a partnership with another company, have three stores out at the airport. the location we're in now is our largest. this is our flagship. our offices are here, our receiving is here. the selling space is on the order of 18,000 to 20,000 square feet, and the total pace is, you know, plus another 4,000 to 6,000 square feet. and we have depending on the time of year and counting all of the what we call per diem staff, folks who sort of work on call, about 150 employees. >> so i recently learned that every time i give a tour i say if there's ever an apocalypse in denver, you want to be in this building.