tv Public Affairs Events CSPAN November 14, 2016 10:00am-12:01pm EST
>> a view outside the capital as republican candidates will be speaking at a form this afternoon and members but to recommend candidates for tuesday's election. the mme statement as there given here on c-span. leadership elections for house democrats are scheduled for thursday but politico and others report that a group is pushing to delay those elections saying democrats and more time to evaluate to the election results. politico writing today the group is not explicitly calling for leadership but want a discussion about a. top housesi and other democrats are aware of the
request. congressman seth moulton kathleen rice and rubin gallego have all signed the letter addressed to nancy pelosi more than 20 other the democrats are also supporting the delay. part and iteads in is vital our caucus to the time to listen to the american people and learn the lessons of this difficult election to be in the best position to fight this dangerous agenda of donald trump and a realistic chance of taking back the house in 2018. you can to the rest of this in politico today. president obama is going to have a news conference today before heading on his european trip, live coverage will be on one of the c-span networks beginning at 3:15 this afternoon. here is more on the freshman orientation. >> turning us now to walk us through what happens to these newly minted members of congress 's bradford fitch of the congressional management foundation. good morning.
>> good morning. foundation. guest: good morning. host: could you tell us a little bit about your foundation and its role? guest: we are about to enter our 40th year. we wanted more assistance in the management, the running of these small businesses that is what they are. 435 small businesses. we have added an element of citizen engagement training. now there are thousands of americans that go to our training event that learn how congress works. we help congress try to do a better job of engaging and interacting with citizens. we help citizens do a better job of understanding and interacting with congress. if we do our job right, but are laws are made. host: tell us what goes on for those newly elected numbers of congress. houston do they start training, and what will they learn? they started their training the morning after they got elected.
there is really no break after you get elected to the house and senate. we turn on the firehose the morning after. it is a difficult and challenging task to set up a congressional office. i was chief of staff for a freshman member of the house of representatives if you years ago. i felt like there were all the headaches of starting a small business with all the red tapes of starting a bureaucracy. they have to get staff, offices, and a jerk. it is like running a small business. they have to think it through, and at the same time make policy decisions and come up with different positions that they did not have before. maybe they came from the state legislature and had some positions on local issues, but now they have to have a position and opinions on a iranian nuclear deal climate change, or an infrastructure bill. it presents a policy challenge and an operational challenge. host: from now until they are
seated in congress next year, do they come to washington and stay for that education? is it done in several steps? how does that work? guest: congressman do it a little different. the orientation starts for the new members tomorrow. they will be here on tuesday. they going to meetings with current members of congress. they meet with the institutional staff. they find out everything from what are the operational roles i have to work by, to what are the ethics rules, which are stringent and very transparent that they have to learn. they get a lot of education from mentors. members of congress will turn to other people and their delegation, their party, and they will try to get a little bit of what happened to you experience. that happens for the next couple of weeks while they are in washington. then they will go back home and
get sworn in in early january. get their do they office, when do they start hiring staff? give us those details. guest: members of congress don't officially get the keys to their office until they are officially sworn in, probably january 4 this year. they do not get office space or official tools to do hiring or sign contracts the united states senate provides each senator elect one staff member. the house members don't get any staff. they have to do this from volunteers and campaign staff. host: bradford fitch with the congressional management foundation. what doe let you go, you think is the most important lesson for an incoming member of congress? not, it iseve it or being disciplined in what you want to do.
most members of congress really want to change the world. they want to do everything. you really cannot do that. if you want to change the world, you have to run for president. you can maybe do two or three things as a member of the house of representatives. if you don't have a strategic plan, they will become one of two types of members. if they are in a safe congressional district, they will become ineffective. if they are in an unsafe district, they will become a former member. accomplish a few things, and the voters will usually reward you. host: >> we learned that week members of the republican national committee will be discussing the result of last week's election. it will have live coverage of a during a 12:30 eastern on our companion
network, c-span2. the new freshmen members will not be a part of the lame-duck session which begins today. on the to do list is legislation extending government funding past december 9 deadline to prevent a shutdown. also to work out different versions of the aid to michigan for the contaminated drinking water system. also i work on a bill to promote defense department programs. the house returns at 2:00 p.m. eastern this afternoon. on our to the senate companion network, c-span2 starting at 5:30 tomorrow. of a conference not analyzing the 2016 election results in a impact on the budgetary process in the lame-duck session of congress. and have president-elect trump will work with the new congress in 2017. [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] [applause] >> good afternoon and welcome to
our panel discussion called who gets the money? as we were just observing for the discussion began, became more interesting after tuesday's results. we are focusing on the budget and appropriations process in congress that may be flying higher because we have this panel of very smart people to talk about the budget and appropriations. panel in ourll the program. i will do some quick introductions. to my far left i am joined by the senior fellow on economic studies in the center for health policy at brookings. as most of you probably know the director office of management and budget in the bill clinton administration.
as will as the former vice chair in compliments that i can't even try to list. next to alice is robert bixby the executive director of the concord coalition who is a member of the commission. a connection there. is the global forecasting director for the economist intelligence -- intelligence unit part of our parent company. next to him is stan colander with a blogger and very entertaining one. and the budget guy on twitter if you follow him on twitter. >> thank you for saying that. >> i don't know how i don't know hey got that handle, that is a good one. he is the executive vice president was worked on the staff of the house and senate budget committees notably. finally, -- two good twitter handles right here. a senior adviser and the committee for responsible budget
and a former hill aide. this is a really great panel and i very much appreciate that they are all joining us here today. it seems like we should probably start with what is on everybody's mind right away which is the lame-duck session. andbig question on the hill but it follows this is how donald trump victory will influence the process in the lame-duck. though we see a continuing resolution or another continuing resolution until next year as some conservatives are advocating? lucien omnibus bill or many -- will we see an omnibus bill? will a second continuing resolution be needed? congress comes back in on monday so this is a pressing question. all of theat government shutdown which we
talk about we talk about government funding? ed, can you start us out? >> i think that no one really knows the answer of the question. it hasn't been decided yet. there is definitely a strong push to do a continuing resolution into the next presidency. for president trump to be able to have some input in it. there are couple of challenges to that, one the department of part of thed be resolution. the pentagon is already started to face problems because their nextting with the cr until year would cause severe problems for the pentagon and their ability to have you acquisitions and that is something a lot of republican members have been concerned about. it would be unlikely you would have senate democrats agreeing appropriationsof because democrats have been united on treating defense and
nondefense the same. is the trumption transition he needs to decide they may have a say on it. on the other hand an omnibus would be very time intensive. today really want to start the beginning of their term getting into line items when they want items ofe big picture obama care repeal and other items. when president obama came into office there was an appropriations bill left over. that took up a lot of their time from omb on the numbers and probably were seated nafta do that. >> first of all, i'm in the middle of a contest with someone in my office to see it get the most twitter followers by the end of the year. [laughter] >> before i go any further, my dgetguy,handle is @thebu
we put a lot of money on this bet. if you'd write now go to your phone to follow me i would appreciate it. the real answer to your question realr the answer to your question is this is one of the thinks that is changed dramatically tuesday night. up until then i had been expecting democratic senate and a democratic president that the chances of anything getting done by december 9 were relatively small and that the sea are -- cr would be extended once or twice was to the real incentive now is to do what ed was talking about which is to pass the cr get out of town and leave it to the new house and senate and president to have a legislative victory. i don't think trump will get that involved with the details. areone thing you mentioned
the drawbacks the defense can be handled in the cr. they can use some of the language i think that might happen. chances of a shutdown which are probably were 50-50 before the election are now zero. i think they are out of here by december 9. >> any of the rest of you? >> no, i agree. fromther thing, president was very critical of the balanced budget agreement that was agreed to in 2015 which set the top line for discretionary spending. thate big question is, will be $1.07 trillion does president-elect trump insists that the spending level be back trillionhe $1.04
number? that would great significant challenges in nuclear appropriations bill. >> which a lot of republicans are interested in. >> but then you have appropriate is that want to the higher number. trying to disclose that would be a challenge. >> i agree also i think the main point is the election of president trump and the retention of control does give everybody incentive to get on transitionss of the without any disruptions. >> one of his first orders of business on the budget will be submitting a budget. there was theoretically a february deadline. that gets stretched i believe president obama had an outline when he came in and revealed the details later on by may or so. we can only imagine there will be many changes from the obama budget request.
that we may start to get an idea as soon as february, what do you folks think would be some of the notable shifts that we would see, broadly speaking, and will there be any attempts initially at entitlement changes? >> i think -- i'm sorry. >> i was going to say the most obvious change would be the repeal of obamacare. assuming the president's new budget, i think we should look at this budget very carefully. we have a new administration coming in. the first of budget of a new administration is really really important. ,t sets the tone for the next everything of clinton's first budget or reagan's or obamas, there will be certain things we may be debating for the next four or eight years. the obamacare please is one of the discretionary spending will be interesting to see what they want to do there. on defense and
lower on nondefense. although some think you need to fit in money for the wall, because they're going to pay for it anyway. the probably won't be an asterisk that says "see, mexico." >> why not? an infrastructure agenda. it will be really interesting to see what he put in there. the number of $500 billion has been floated around. that will be rather eye-popping for some republicans on the house side. those are interesting now how bigtax cut is going to be also. republicans have had a goal of balancing the budget at least within 10 years. it seems to me impossible to do trumpn the agenda that laid out during the campaign without making some really historic -- extraordinary assumptions about economic growth, which he did during the campaign. into thegets factored
budget will be something really interesting to look at. a lot of the issues will be how much of the agenda set by what he talked about in the campaign versus congressional republicans. remembering, publicans in congress have called for balance in 10 years. the did so with a lot of unspecified savings and assuming some other unrealistic assumptions. you have 230 rank-and-file republican to believe that there committed to balance the budget in 10 years. the fully expect the president trump to submit a plan that -- plan that balances within 10 years. we estimated that it would increase the deficit in excess of $5 trillion. over 10 years. track by the end of this year probably $1.4 trillion and can president trump
submitted budget anywhere near that amount, how does he square all of that with wanted to have a bottom line. ofhink there is expectation economic assumptions. it is hard even with those economic assumptions to have something that works in the budget office back and show how much higher. there's going to be tensions try to pass this budget with their rhetoric. >> talk about the economic assumptions, i hope trump doesn't put in a 4.5% gdp growth rate because that is what he was talking about. there is zero chance of that happening in this economy to get anywhere near 3% would be great. that will be an initial signal that at least some of what he's putting it is not very realistic. >> it seems to me that trump, the new trump team has a decision to make, do they really
want to work out all of these things in the president's budget , a serious budget that adds up and does various things. order the first want to make a campaign statement. and get some things out there, some tax items and some others. in a kind of preliminary statement and then say we will tell you about the whole budget later. into thet drag on spring. little of how they are working with the leadership of congress, if at all. to the want the venture to become, again, what it used to be, a basis for serious work and any taxations committees in the congress or do
they wanted to be more of a political statement of this is our going in position and we will work with you as it develops. >> if i could just add, using the numbers and my own background my guess is they will come down with increasing the deficit. and not being shy about it or ashamed about it. myself abouting past performance is no indication of future returns. we have to stop assuming that the republicans of the past eight years that this is the same party we will see over the next couple of years. i am assuming much bigger deficits, trillions of dollars a year for the four years for the may be in the out years showing a bigger and faster reduction. i think we are about to see the republicans rebranding a party ofas
deficits and the producers jobs and economic growth it will say it is worth it. >> it will be interesting whether the fiscal conservatives actually agree to that. i think trump would want to do that and maybe some of his supporters why would the people whom a john boehner's life so miserable a year ago suddenly decide they like huge budget deficits? >> because they will be given with a republican rather than a democrat. i think that will make a big difference. >> actually, i don't think it will. i think it would be difficult to thatnce the house majority limited government and a lot of lack ofusiasm or enthusiasm for the republican establishment is because they thought they weren't sufficiently committed to fiscal restraint. an era of well be trillion dollar deficits coming up at i don't think it is going to be because republicans will
suddenly decide that they wanted. they may enact policies and make excuses for it. i don't think it will suddenly declare the deficit -- that deficits don't matter. think it will be the same. >> i agree with that. i think all of us are too focused on the campaign promises at the moment because that is all we have. i go back to the clinton administration when we came in, we were very focused on the budget, the president had promised to get the deficit coming down. but, the campaign promises, many of them just went by the board. the promised a big introduction program which never happened. he promised a big middle-class
tax-cut, these were things that the budgeteers simply said sorry, we can't afford it. to have a going deficit coming down. they may not be that kind of but it must be remembered that not all campaign promises and that the presidential programs. >> that is a good reminder. is a lot of interest in talking about that. the debt ceiling suspension expired march 15 as everybody knows and congress is not untilly act that we on it the treasury probably begins the use of extraordinary measures. an interesting picture president-elect trump coming to congress to ask to do this. very interesting. how do you think this debate is going to play out on the debt ceiling? wish you wouldn't
go through this process every couple of years. 2011-13 again, it is reckless and very risky to get to this point where the treasury is sending letters every week saying this is how much money we have left in the pot and aren't quite sure what is coming in and get ourselves in a position where there is a risk of defaulting on treasury debt. i know people understand this but i can pick it absolutely financially in the u.s. really genuinely defaulting on the treasury debt. if you think it was a shock of trump getting elected two days ago watch what happens the day after the u.s. defaults. >> what would happen? >> the recession would start the next morning. it would be worse than 2008. almost every financial insurance in the world and not just in the u.s. is based off of treasury dollar to somehe
extent for the everybody has been in the portfolio. interest rates would go through the roof the next morning. almost $40arket is trillion. 40 trillion of that is treasuries and the rest is corporate bonds. every single interest rate associated with this goes through the roof the next morning. i can't even estimate how bad it would be. it hasn't happened because usually somebody exercises on leadership to prevent this from happening. it is the safe haven of all safe havens, there are still nothing even close to it. even though we generally know that they were reach some sort of agreement before this happens, why even risk it? close toten shockingly not actually being able to pay some debt in the past. i just wish they would do with them done right now, suspend the debt ceiling and just make it
permanent. that would save a lot of aggravation. , theeen times like 2011 stock market went down and bond yields went up. there was some cost associated with that. it will not default on the debt. to the point we were just discussing before, i think you ask as a going to be a bargaining chip again, i wish it wasn't but i don't see why it wouldn't be again. because of trump has an aggressive spending plan and it looks like he will with and sayucture i think the same thing why is this going to lead to higher deficits? it will. and if it does that, fiscal conservatives want be happy about this post of they will use whatever tools are available good in the debt ceiling. i suspect whether the new treasury secretary is we'll do which is chart writing these anguished letters from march until saying we're july, getting closer and closer, please do thing about this. >> i agree with everything you
said about that, the importance of raising the ceiling and not doing it, but i think that goes to the point of why i think there will be pressure on president-elect trump to have a plan to try to deal with the deficit, whether it's in his budget or shortly thereafter. but i think getting the votes to pass while the deficit is going higher is going to be a challenge. i think it will be interesting to see what role congressional democrats play. that is one place where they may be needed in trump is ignoring them, then they can't get the votes for debt limits. do congressional democrats take the responsible position and supply the votes, or do they say, you bought it, you own it, it's up to you to pass debt limits? i think the existence of the debt limit is just another reason, in addition to the position that republicans take, that they will be pressured to show they're doing something on
the deficit. ms. norman: and who would be the republicans who would split off on that? who would not agree. would it be a sizeable group, do you think? mr. lorenzen: it could be. it's a combination. it will be the freedom caucuses. it will be other republican members. ms. norman: who would be on the freedom caucus? mr. lorenzen: because for all the campaign proposals that trump talked about during the campaign, he also constantly talked about how bad the debt would be and all the republican candidates talked about how bad the debt would be. looking ahead to two years from now, if they voted to raise the debt limit, that's going to cause problems with a lot of the people who voted, thinking they were voting for controlling the debt, notwithstanding the fact that the policies would increase them, and trying to square those two and come up with something is going to be a challenge. >> several quick points. number one, i can't remember the last time a congress of one party vetoed or torpedoed a debt
ceiling request made by a president of their own party. that's just one. number two, i find it hard to believe that the house freedom caucus would end up doing things that would torpedo a trump presidency, particularly in the first year. mr. collender: it may happen. it may happen that they think of themselves above the president, but they're in safe districts and can almost certainly get around it. third, i don't know what they'd want in return. i mean, the freedom caucus, a portion of the republican party that is presumably in position to make life difficult for president trump on the debt ceiling, they're going to want the tax cuts. they're going to want the defense increases. they're going to want obamacare repealed or partially repealed. all three of those things will increase the deficit. so, what is it -- do they want to eliminate the domestic side of the budget? there's not enough there, unless you talk about medicaid and medicare, which the president-elect has said he won't touch, medicare and social
security, excuse me, because there's not enough on the discretionary side to make a dent in the trillion deficit. i'm trying to figure out what the deal would be. ms. norman: did either of you want to. ms. rivlin: well, paradoxically, it may be the first time that democrats are thinking the debt ceiling is a useful tool here to keep republicans from doing things like really deep tax cuts that benefit upper-income people, or there may be a little bit of joining forces with the freedom caucus to hold the trump administration to its more fiscal, responsible pronouncements. >> well, one of the things i worry about there is, if you get
into a disagreement over the debt limit, one of the ideas that came out before that was passed in the house was this idea of prioritization, change the laws so if the government doesn't default, it can pay some of its bills. ms. rivlin: right. mr. bixby: which is really bankruptcy. i mean, it's a form of it. that would be a bad idea also. and so i worry with both houses and a republican president, somehow that kind of bill might get signed. so, i think a better approach would be for trump, ryan and mcconnell, to realize that they have a common agenda. it does require higher borrowing. even if they did not do any -- ryan's budget from last year required a higher debt limit. they didn't acknowledge it. ms. rivlin: they didn't do it. yeah. mr. bixby: so this is a good teaching opportunity for all of the members that think that you
can run the government without raising the debt limit. and it could be that the silver lining here is that the three, you know, the leader of the house and senate and the white house, would simply either easily pass a debt limit increase or find some way to, like was suggested, a permanent -- maybe permanently -- >> could you do that? could you permanently -- mr. bixby: you can extend it without a date, sure. just have it sort of hanging out there as a threat. you know, that would be a good thing. put it in cryogenics. or something. just have it out there. [laughter] >> and stan is right, though. freedom caucus and others, if they decide they actually don't care that much about the deficit, because you said they're getting everything they want anyway, at some point, anybody who remembers the first year of the clinton administration, the bond markets could have a say on this at some point. again, in the last two days since trump has been in, there's already been a rout in the bond market. if we start getting fiscal
deficits, back to 4%, 5%, 6% of g.d.p., the way we had back in the 1980's, then the interest rates go up. right now, the interest on these deficits is a little over 1% of g.d.p. we have got very low-interest rates. the average interest rate on the government debt is less than 2%. if the interest rates keep going up because the bond market pushes them up, then it becomes a lot harder to finance the deficit at that point. there's a lot of pressure on the hill. they may politically have what they want as well, but if the financial markets start to pressure them, somebody has to act more responsibly. mr. bixby: i think you raised the issue of entitlement reform, too, in your question. that's directly relevant in the sense that really, the way to get the budget back on a sustainable track, get the debt back on a sustainable track, has nothing to do with the debt limit. those of us who are saying the debt limit should be put to sleep are not arguing for putting fiscal responsibility to sleep. [laughter] mr. bixby: i mean, i think a
better way, the only way you can keep the debt from rising on its unsustainable current course is to change the spending and tax policies of the united states government. capping the debt itself is a counterproductive thing. it doesn't control the debt. and it has all the problems that leo has outlined. so i speak as a committed fiscal hawk on these issues, but what we need to do is have a change in long-term, entitlement program, tax reform, to bring about a sustainable fiscal policy. that's the way to keep the debt from going on an unsustainable course. >> that may be where the deal goes and what the freedom caucus wants. i would say that, interesting on the trump transition website, it has language now on medicaid reform that's still vague in general, but it talks about -- i can't remember the exact phrase, but it talks about to prepare for future generations, future needs. it was clearly a nod towards the
types of medicare reform that paul ryan has talked about. very vague but at least there's that small opening that maybe they will go there. i will keep the options. the cubs won the world series, so i'm going to be optimistic on everything, as a cubs fan, that perhaps after president trump cracks down on social security fraud, discover that you still have 98% of the social security insolvency left -- i think, you know, i do think the congressional republicans will want to see some entitlement reform. mr. lorenzen: i've seen at least some signs that maybe president trump would let them take the lead on it and go along with it. >> i have got a quick question for leo. this is a substantive question. you may not know the answer. how much of the u.s. debt rolls over every year? how much is short-term versus long-term? >> a lot. >> a lot? mr. abruzzese: yeah. i'd say about 40% of it, i think it is. >> sounds right.
mr. bixby: so if the interest rates start rising, the government is on essentially the largest adjustable rate mortgage in history? >> right. >> so that in addition to defense spending going up and infrastructure spending and tax cuts and god knows what else, we are likely to have also higher interest payments that are currently being assumed. >> the interest payment right now -- right now, on everything, from bills right out to the 30-year bonds right now, the government is paying, as you know, relatively little. it's cheap to borrow right now. so across the entire maturity range, it's less than 2%. it has been very cheap. this is why a lot of economists say it's actually good to spend money on infrastructure because the money is basically not quite free but very close to being free so you might as well invest in it. actually, spending money on infrastructure is not a bad thing, because the money is cheap. of course it is not going to be cheap. the fed might also decide to push rates up more. i was discussing this with alice.
in another three weeks, you might see a fed rate increase as well. but it's going to make borrowing more expensive, over time. ms. norman: what do you think about that? ms. rivlin: oh, i think they won't go -- they'll go up in december, as they said they would, but they're certainly not going to go up very fast. one more point. i fully subscribe to bob's eloquent defense of fiscal responsibility in the long run. [laughter] ms. rivlin: and his pointing out that it involves entitlement and tax reform, but the more you cut taxes, the bigger hole you dig, and i see the big danger right now that we'll have a explosive tax cut and then it will be really difficult. now, it's only politically difficult. then, it will be really difficult to find any entitlement reforms that bring the two, spending and tax laws, together. ms. norman: we want it all, don't we? we want it all.
if we could move to reconciliation. budget resolutions, of the coming year. last year, the house did not adopt a budget resolution, because there was so much internal division at that point over what the spending level should be. the senate didn't pass one because of a provision in the two year budget deal, as you all know, that allowed them to just file a spending top line and appropriators went on ahead, although it's kind of in limbo right now. could one of you explain for us what reconciliation means and why a budget resolution is needed and how reconciliation might be used by this new congress, why reconciliation has suddenly become the word of the week here around washington? >> this is a pet issue of mine, that the budget reconciliation is budget legislation. in its original design, i believe it was to actually implement changes in policies, to implement the budget resolution. the budget resolution sets the spending and revenue targets,
and reconciliation legislation then provides for changes in the permanent laws and the tax and spending policies to bring spending and revenues. that is at least, from a budget nerd perspective, the way it should be done. mr. lorenzen: so, if you have a budget that is calling for substantial spending cuts or tax changes to meet certain changes, reconciliation legislation is implementing that. however, reconciliation has a special status. budget resolution and then reconciliation legislation reconciliation legislation passed pursuant to a budget resolution is not specific to a filibuster. it can pass with 51 votes in the senate. so reconciliation has now become not the way to necessarily implement the entire budget but whatever piece of legislation that the majority wants to push through with 51 votes in the senate, so there's talk about using reconciliation to repeal the affordable care act, to do it for tax reform. i still would like to think, if you have a budget resolution that is calling for deficit reduction, that really should be
what reconciliation is used for. but it's not. there's limits on reconciliation. maybe we may see reconciliation for the debt limits. but legislation, repealing the affordable care act would be both revenue and spending and therefore, you could not do a separate reconciliation bill with tax reform if you did a budget resolution. if you did it on tax reform, you couldn't do the affordable care act. and then also, the borough rule has lots of limits on what can be included in the reconciliation bill. the two most notable limitations are reconciliation cannot have anything with effects. if we use reconciliation to repeal the affordable care act, you could only repeal the parts that have the subsidies, tax increases and spending. all of the regulations regarding pre-existing conditions could not be addressed in reconciliation. you would have a swiss cheese affordable care act. you would have a lot of the structure still in place but without any of the spending or
revenues for it. the other important distinction is that you cannot have anything to increase a deficit beyond the 10-year window. and so, with the affordable care act, some of the revenue raisers and savings are growing over time, you would have to, you may not be able to repeal the tax increases but delay them, and if you did tax reform to reconciliation, likewise, you would have the rate reductions in some sets. like the bush once in 2001. it probably will not come to pass, but there has been speculation in the past that congress would pass during the lame-duck session a budget resolution for fiscal year 2017 with reconciliation instructions that would allow congress to move first thing next year on the reconciliations for the affordable care act repeal. and then, follow-up and has a regular budget resolution in april, with a fresh set of reconciliation instructions.
that could then be used for tax reform or deficit reduction or other purposes. it has never been tested whether the parliamentarians would agree with that. that interpretation. ms. norman: my first question. mr. lorenzen: the senate is an ongoing body. it would still be part of senate rules. it is at least theoretically possible. that would also require making decisions very quickly and you would have to resolve what that means for the discretionary spending level and other problems. it is at least an idea that is out there. ms. rivlin: i checked my e-mails about 6:30 or so. i have done a little bit of checking. i have a slightly different rumor. i hear that congress might not take up a budget in the lame duck session but in the beginning of the next session. that it would first be for 2017, there is not one for 2017. mr. collender: you do a budget
resolution in january that includes reconciliation instructions. this part is going to be hypothetical. that would repeal part of the aca. right, and then, that is all it would do. basically. then, six months later, congress would do a budget resolution for 2018, the regular budget resolution for the incoming year, that will include a separate set of reconciliation instructions. the real value of reconciliation is that it prevents a filibuster in the senate. ms. norman: right. mr. collender: that is the real value of it. a 52-48 republican majority could move forward without being worried about the democratic filibuster unless the republicans did not stay unified. it would be, you may know. i have never seen this kind of maneuver done before. two budget resolutions in one year. with reconciliation. can you recall anything like
this? >> no, i do not think that has ever happened. there were two budget resolutions originally in the law, and it was too complicated to get it all done so they changed the law. this suggests two things i wanted to say. all of these inside the beltway complexities we have been talking about up here have been thought about in the context of divided government for the last few years. and the context may have changed. now, the 60 votes in the senate has not changed. but the idea that all of this sort of using the rules to get what you want is going to be typical of a congress which has
a president of its own making in the white house, i think, can be questioned. and then, that comes back to my other point that the trump administration really has to decide, does it want to continue the campaign? in which case, the first thing to do would be to repeal the affordable care act and not worry about what happens to the 20 million people who are insured by it. or do they want to govern in a way that is good for the people who elected them, many of whom get subsidies under the affordable care act? i am an optimistic sort. so, i think maybe they want to repeal and replace, and replace is a complicated thing to do. repeal is easy. replace is harder. and there are quite a number of republican proposals that have been put on the table which they
could work on, and i think they would be smart to bring some democrats in on that as well because one party passing a health care law just leaves it open to attack from the other one. but most of the proposals we have seen from republicans look a lot like modifications of the affordable care act. now, you can call it trump-care. [laughter] ms. rivlin: you can do some things republicans always have wanted to do, and you can solve real problems in the act. my hope would be they would want something that works as a legacy for the trump administration, not just "we said we were going to repeal obamacare, and now look at it." ms. norman: we will have time for one or two questions. if folks in the audience do have questions, we have microphones on stands over here and over here.
>> i agree with alice, and i want to interject a note of gridlock. [laughter] ms. norman: i think we have had enough of that. >> well, i think we will still have some problems on appropriations. mr. bixby: i think we will have a budget resolution because that is the best, easiest vehicle to do what they want to do on obamacare. you want to get around the filibuster. on appropriations, these republicans will undoubtedly set a much lower level of discretionary spending that the democrats are going to live with, and we still have the possibility and probability of senate filibuster on appropriations bills in the senate, which means we could be back in the same boat of government shutdowns at the end
of the year next year. anyway, it would suggest a potential basis for having some sort of broader negotiations. i think, to pick up on alice's optimism however, when you have the senate, house, and white house all in the same hands, the republican party does have the unified responsibility to govern. they cannot blame it on anybody else. so some of -- may be democrats in the senate, you never know, but there may be --you know, some of the campaign rhetoric that goes back and forth might get dumped by the side, as you say, "what can we get done here? we are now responsible." that is kind of the optimistic scenario for bigger things getting done. >> real quick on this discretionary spending, for 2017
and going forward, there are vast trump called for a repeal defense sequester. it would require 60 votes to change that. democrats could then provide sequester relief for defense. that could lead to negotiations as well. ms. norman: looks like we have a question over here. please go ahead. >> following up, the most recent two comments. this is, this session is titled, "who gets the money?" you addressed defense. in terms of other agencies, are -- justice, hud, congress, are commerce, are there particular agencies you think would do well in terms of trump budgets? or ones that you think would get hit particularly hard? ms. norman: good question. ms. rivlin: well, let me start. i think defense will do better.
transportation will do better because we will have a big infrastructure bill, although not all the infrastructure would necessarily be transportation. and i think hhs is going to be big no matter what. they are not going to make significant cuts in the big health care programs. the subsidies in obamacare, even if they go away, are tiny compared to medicare-medicaid. >> you got to say immigration and naturalization. >> there is also cuts in programs that are unauthorized. but is not necessarily a guide. every other agency will be authorized. everything except for veterans
and emigration, naturalization, defense, every other agency will be looking at deep cuts in their discretionary spending. >> one other question i could not help, "who gets the money?" maybe 40% of the budget is social security-medicare, medicaid. when you're talking about who gets the money? in a trump administration or obama administration, the central dilemma of the budget is that portion is growing faster than the economy, health care and social security are the only parts of the budget growing faster or projected to grow faster than the economy. so, who gets the money? that is where the money is going. ms. norman: that is our sobering reality, isn't it? on that note, we will be closing our session. this has been a great discussion. thank you. [applause]
>> congress's lame-duck session start date and on the to do list to extend government funding passed the december 9 deadline to resolve the government shutdown, there is a plan to work on aid to flint, michigan residents for premediation of their drinking water system and a bill to promote radical -- medical research.
you get to the house at 2:00 eastern this afternoon on c-span in the senate's back tomorrow at 5:30 eastern you can watch the senate on c-span2. the hail on that from this morning, congressional republicans face internal division over health far to go in repealing and replacing obamacare. one of the top political priorities of the past six years, how the plan to do that without disrupting the lives of millions of americans, conservatives like texas and the ted cruz are pushing for the law to be ripped out "root and branch," but centrist republicans worry about many people being kicked off of insurance rolls if obamacare is repealed. they want to transition as smoothly as possible. you can read more about that in thehill.com today. the senior and of rnc leaders will be holding a postelection briefing later today to discuss the committee's
role in the election for stub c-span2 will have that live starting at 12:30 eastern. back here on c-span jeh johnson will be joining state and local officials and private industry representatives for a forum on of our infrastructure and modernization efforts live at noon eastern time today. we have more now on what is ahead for congress and president-elect of our trump, at actions the current congress may take in the lame-duck session. >> joining us now to longtime observers. two longtime observers of congress to talk about what the new congress faces from now until the end of the year and what the incoming administration of donald trump. francine kiefer with the christian science monitor. niels lesniewski is a senior staff writer for "roll call." let me bounce a headline off of you. the republicans will use the lame-duck session to set the stage for donald trump. how much truth is in that
narrative? guest: we are not sure how republicans will use the lame-duck session. the main job is to get the budget done. party,the republican there are conservatives who want to push that into next year so that they have a friendly president to deal with their budget, and the republican leadership wants to get the budget done now so that they can have the new president start with a clean slate. will not clear which side win out on this. my guess is the leaders will win out and do what they can to move the ball along, and as speaker ryan says hit the road running next year. what: a lot of that may be the president-elect decides to say. tohe were to let it be known the more conservative members of the house and his supporters,
people who have endorsed him that he wants and is on board senateeaker ryan and majority leader mitch mcconnell in a longer-term agreement on appropriations so we do not have to do with that is in as he takes office, people will probably go along with it. what is interesting here is that because the president-elect is a complete outsider to this process and has never really made this sort of sausage before, the vice president-elect was certainly in house republican leadership for a fair amount of time, so he may be the one who is not necessarily calling the shots but has significant influence in how this process gets done. that is the question. whether the president-elect and vice president-elect are going
to insert themselves into this process in terms of how they want to see this done. host: we saw donald trump last week making the visit to congress. did we learn anything as far as what mr. trump is interested in? guest: he gave a list of three priorities leaving mitch mcconnell's office at the capital. he said he was interested in health care, immigration, and what he calls big league jobs. he left vague what he meant on any of those three. there is some more detail in the 60 minutes interview that aired sunday evening, but there are still a lot of holes to be filled in and details to be written. jobs couldbig league include any number of things. it could include tax reform
because republicans leave that tax reform will stimulate the economy. it could be infrastructure, which would be a big jobs greater in terms of capital spending and bridges and highways. or it could be rolled back of regulations that republicans think are repressive and keep the economy from growing. it is probably all those things because last night on 60 minutes president-elect trump talked about tax reform specifically. house majority leader mccarthy yesterday talked about infrastructure. i think that could enclose all three of those things. for: (202) 748-8000 democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8002 for independents. if you want to ask our guests
about the agenda for congress this year. we will take your calls in just a moment. infrastructure, a lot of people can agree on this subject, but the number one thing is the cost. guest: it is huge. one price tag that has been put on what is actually needed is $1 trillion. president-elect trump has been talking about half of that much. even half that much is a big price tag. one idea is to involve the private sector so it does not become what is expensive for the federal government. you have democrats and omming onto this idea is generally because the country needs is so bad dly. -- badly. guest: once you have that price tag, the question is how do you pay for it? if everyone agrees they need half $1 billion, to use roughly
the trunk figure four infrastructure projects, there are those who say it should be paid for by increasing the gas tax. there is then no interest in that among republicans. proposals forr people who want to put more tolls they want to construct using that source of revenue. then there is the question of whether or not you can repatriate foreign earnings, whether you can use proceeds from dollars that have been kept offshore that might be part of a tax reform plan. you could use some of that to pay for infrastructure. there are a lot of payment options out there, but they all involve the tax code. no one has come up with a way of rebuilding highways and bridges and tunnels without going
through the tax code. we will take some calls from our viewers. florida, republican line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. obviously, this year we saw very radical ideas from the left and the right. what is the move for donald trump, politically speaking, to bring the country together? we know mike pence will lead the legislative aspect. what does donald trump do to bring the country together? god bless. host: maybe you want to put your thoughts on the legislative aspect. i suspect there will be inviting on both sides. -- infighting on both sides. guest: i think there is this question of whether or not when donald trump becomes resident and working with mike pence and the leaders on capitol hill should start with something that has come in terms of the legislative agenda, has some
bipartisan buy-in. we know that's one of the top priorities for the president-elect will have to be this vacant seat on the supreme court. every indication that he has given is that he is going to nominate a conservative in the mold of antonin scalia to fill the seat that has been vacant since scalia died. that is probably not going to be an area for broad bipartisanship. if you have this one partisan i don't that will immediately be on the agenda, maybe you need to figure out something with respect to infrastructure or some other sort of job creation measure or something that has been sitting out there. if they don't get, in the lame-duck session, this bipartisan package of legislation that is a big
investment in public health research, if that does not get done this year, maybe you pick that up in january and february to foster some goodwill. guest: i was speaking with senator susan collins of maine last week. she is one of the few remaining moderate republicans in the senate. she said quite explicitly that she helped the first move -- hoped the first move would be on infrastructure. s'judgment oniel bringing some piece of legislation back, if they bring back senator mcconnell preference, then they could bring back mental health where there host: ray, you are next. caller: good morning, c-span.
i watched the think tanks for the republican party six or seven years ago. he made a statement that they would obstruct everything president obama tried to pass and then come 2016, they would blame everything on the president. it really worked. the american electorate was so ill-informed and uneducated that they would believe anything. i want to take my hat off to him. it worked. guest: i think what we are going to face this time is an issue of high expectations for this presidency. trumpestion is can mr. build his wall? a realdeal with replacement of obamacare? theraised the -- way presidency is won, you get votes
by making big promises. mr. trump is getting votes by his big, bold promises. even with a united government under one-party control, it is not so easy to get some of those big promises done. guest: let's take obamacare, for instance. the reason why that was able to get enacted into law in the first place was because a democratic president combined with the democratic-controlled house and a democratic caucus in the senate that have, for a brief period of time, 60 votes, super majority needed to overcome a filibuster threat. republicansly 52 likely in the senate in the next session. frankly, if the caller was from the louisiana, there is an outside possibility there are only 51 because there is still a runoff to be had in louisiana
the democrats are suddenly interested in. either way, it is such a narrow margin, that people like senator collins of maine and other moderate, more moderate republican members and moderate democrats will all have to be on board in order to get much done, particularly on obamacare, because it is an easier lift to just flat out, largely got the theent program -- gut current program, but that does not seem to be what mr. trump is talking about. that may be procedurally more complicated than to roll back what happened in 2009 and 2010. host: is that because of what he said keeping -- about keeping children's on until they are 26 and the pre-existing conditions clause? , the: the more you keep
more difficult it becomes to draft a reconciliation bill. that is a budget procedure to pass with a simple majority vote through the senate. more complicated the legislation is, the more complicated it will be to get the parliamentarians to buy in to that it fits into the arcane budget rules. host: we saw republicans releasing policy papers to move forward. does health care fall under that plan? guest: speak a ryan is very proud that he has been busy behind the scenes getting chamberan by an on his -- in his chamber on his program called "a better way." that includes things like tax reform, it also includes health care reform. actually, he and mr. trump do have some commonalities.
they both say that insurance companies ought to be a will to work across state lines, so that people can have, so that there would be a larger insurance exchange to buy from. they both want to kick the medicare part of obamacare back to the states and have them manage that. here is the thing. even though speaker ryan is very abouted with this buy in his broad principles, none of that is in legislation. it is not a legislative language and that is when the trouble begins, when you start hammering out the details. host: i suppose that is one mike pence is going to be very valuable. guest: i think that's quite right. for viewers, when speaker ryan was on one of the sunday morning programs yesterday, he got into a rather testy exchange on cnn with jake tapper about whether
or not -- you don't really want me to ask you -- answer how we are going to pay for that to read were questions he was being ofed about the particulars how provisions of his health care overhaul would be paid for. ryan was insisting that they were in the plan, but he was basically saying, do you really want to waste the audience's time with the details and the interview moved on. host: let's go to houston, texas, the independent line. reginald. caller: good morning. good morning. host: you are on. caller: i think you should talk about repentance, about crimes against humanity that america on extorted around the world wars that have not -- have been undertaken that should not have been. if we took all of that pentagon budget, he would signed enough -- find the money for social
create a new deal like the roosevelt plan. that could help with some reparations of something that could go to blacks for all the crimes against, they have been exposed to so many against the holocaust of slavery and things that are going on. now that we have maybe this new mold, maybe he can shine some light on america, so that we can be a better nation by taking care of the last, least, and lost. reginald, thank you. i will take an element of what he brought up. even in this conference, they had to do with the national defense authorization act and there is a story today that talks about defense spending in the future, increases anticipated. talk on those fronts. guest: sure. the trump campaign and the
president-elect himself and who work for him and have been associated with them talked about increasing the size and scope of military. manpower, ships, there has been a lot of talk about increasing the size of the naval force under president trump, and that is all going to be costly and will create a situation where it is going to be less likely -- we have recently talked about equal cost increase between discretionary spending and defense spending -- it does not look like that is the way we're going to be going. it looks like we will be spending more on defense and wondering how we are going to pay for it. guest: i would like to the
caller said about reparations, slavery, issues that african america has with this presidency . int has been raised so much this campaign and over the weekend, we saw demonstrations, and people all over facebook and social media have been talking about heightened crimes and andests against minorities the way minorities are treated. i thought it was interesting that that was brought up in the "60 minutes" interview with mr. trump, asking about the harassing of minorities that has been reported in the last week or so since the election announcement. he looked straight into the camera and said, "stop it." i saw a facebook post from one of my friends who said, problem solved. it is not that easy. i think people welcome that mr.
trump has made a direct statement about this now, that this is not acceptable behavior, but the problem is not so easily solved. from "thecine kiefer christian science monitor" joining us. niels lesniewski from "roll call" joining us. what will it like to be a democrat come january? guest: democrats are going to look at this like a two-pronged opportunity. they see themselves as a last .astion against trump-ism on areas of common ground, they are ready to go forward. they also have a special challenge, they have so many members of their own caucus up for reelection in the senate in 2018 that those senators will have specific and unique leverage on what actually gets done. it is not just that there is a lot of democrats up in
2018, it is that many of them are from states that president-elect trump carried and some states that he carried fairly handily. upre are democratic senators in places like indiana, north dakota, west virginia. and they are going to have to run on their own records, on one hand, someone like joe manchin, someone who used to be the governor of west virginia, who has a significant stake in his own state, everybody knows him, but there are going to be some on theting movements part of some of those senators in terms of where they find commonality with the trump agenda. on the other hand, the democrats aow that they may have to be bulwark because some of the things that have said by mr. ,rump and by his supporters
certainly by steve bannon, who is going to be a senior advisor in the trump white house, a lot of these things are just outside the realm of normal conversation in the united states. so, if they are taken literally or if it looks like the white house is starting to take them literally, the democrats have a whole different job on their hands because they are going to have to be pushing back constantly. host: from mike in kentucky, republican line. caller: good morning. thes calling regarding taxes that this gentleman from "roll call" was talking about earlier. the tax structure trump is talking about in regards to 10% for the working man and 15% for corporations, that alone is going to give a definite refund and then we've got the united nations that we give a billion
dollars to for year for no reason. i'm signing the checks. is going to be sent 90 day notice to requalify on social security, whatever you ,re in, if i'm signing a check you are getting it pink slip, you get 90 days to respond. after that, you don't get the check. i will start to put that money back into this lame-duck whatever that thing is called. mike, thanks. guest: well, this raises the whole budget deficit question and what we spend our money on. that gets paul ryan, the house speaker, all excited because he wants to be able to reform medicare and social security,
our main entitlement programs. that puts him in direct conflict with what president-elect trump said on the campaign trail, which is we've got to preserve social security and i won't be touching medicare. i had an interesting discussion last week with one of speaker , thes close allies congressman from oklahoma, who intimated to me that he thought the president would soon realize that everything does not add up and that these reforms are going to have to take place. my thought, although i did not voice it to him, was, i wonder if congress is going to have to change its view because americans don't want to see social security changed and they don't want to see medicare changed and the president is with popular opinion on this one. you were to, as the caller said, do something like -- or if president-elect
trump were to come around to the view that something needed to be done with social security, these are not things that can be done by one person. you can't actually just send a pink slip out to everyone and say, in 90 days, you don't get more money. these are all things that require negotiation with congress. it is outside of the realm of the pen and phone aspects of the presidency. long gone probably far too since we have been able to have , but wouldsation really need to happen for it to happen and not to be too pollyanna-ish about it, but the old stories about president reagan and speaker tip o'neill getting together and talking these things out. what is going to be fascinating
is a more general question. who exactly is going to be trump's democratic dance partner? i don't know what one yet, but that may be a fascinating thing to know. guest: don't you think the natural person for that would be chuck schumer? he would be the minority leader in the senate and they are both new yorkers. they have that new york thing going for them. he seems to be the natural partner. guest: he sure does. do they just start meeting? i don't know. i wouldn't rule out the conversation -- possibility that they start having conversations at trump tower. i'm not sure speaker ryan or senator mcconnell would much like that, but chuck schumer seems like the logical fit. you mentioned the antiestablishment republican caucus. what is the future, especially with the infighting?
guest: this is such an interesting possibility /opportunity. the hard-line republicans in the house have been a thorn in the side of the speaker, whether it was speaker boehner or speaker ryan. speaker ryan has gone to a great deal of effort to include them, especially since he became them speaker, make them part of the conversation, change some of the house rules, so that it is fairer and this group of republicans feels they are part of the game and in the game. as i mentioned earlier, spending is often what the fights this group -- divides this group. cole felt the presidency could unite everyone on the hill. republicans now have a chief standardbearer, it is the president. they have this opportunity to get some of their chief agenda items done and that ought to be opinion the unifying
factor. there is candy being dangled in front of all of them. they can make progress on taxes come on border security, and that this leadership from the white house ought to be everyone in line. there is also the point that trump's anti-establishment, just like the tea party folks are now, who now call themselves the house freedom caucus. the problem is that ideologically they are not all on board. there is still tension involved if progress on republican goals can be made. especially on spending goals. guest: that's right. the other question on the other whether the divisions in the republican party or the divisions in the democratic party and capitol hill are going to be more pronounced?
if the democrats in the senate, but also in the house, our theding united against trump/ryan/mcconnell agenda or whatever it turns out to be, then the people in the freedom caucus groups need to be on board because the numbers are such, they are necessary. you are doing infrastructure packages and whatnot, on the other hand, things like congressman cole would be favorable to come you don't necessarily need the freedom caucus types to get something like that done because you probably will be drafted in such a way to pick up democratic votes. host: zach is up next from vermont. democrats line. caller: hi. hello? host: you are on. caller: good morning, c-span.
i would like to make a quick comment and a statement. i predicted trump was going to win because i knew the country is divided. the united states is still thatering from slavery they have done to african-americans and i knew that trump was taking advantage that a lot ofknew african-americans like myself did not go out and vote and that is why he is president. so, the democrats are going to have to do some rethinking. 2020, heant to win in is going to do a lot of damage when he is in office. another caller said something about reparations. that is impossible. he would never give african-americans reparations. guest: can i ask the caller why you did not go out and vote? host: he is gone, sorry. guest: that would have been an
interesting discussion. has call reminds me of a discussion i had with a voter in pennsylvania north of philadelphia. i was in one of the swing suburbs. this gentleman said to me, and african-american, he felt that trump had opened a pandora's box of race issues. his preference was that that lid kept closed. so that america could kind of proceed on some of these bigger issues. we will see whether he is right about that pandora's box being opened even more largely than it has been in the wake of ferguson and things like that. host: he mentioned 2020, but isn't the emphasis 2018 and the midterms? guest: i was reading something the other day that suggested that not only the midterms, but the democrats are really so far potentially, potentially they are so far in the wilderness
that the real focus should be on ' races and statehouses because redistricting comes up after 2020 and the way that house districts are drawn, they basically need to be playing a really long game, not to borrow the name of mitch mcconnell's memoirs. they need to be playing a really long game, but which is really hard to believe that we will have gone from a democratic presidency and the democrats controlling the senate not that long ago to their needing to be a conversation about whether democratic resources should really even be put into 2018. host: margaret from oklahoma on the independent line. caller: hello. we have first got to do something about our military.
i was talking to somebody working in the military thing the other day. we have a lot of homeless and a lot of people who need help and we need other people who are well able to get out and work. the thing i'm really speaking of his there was a documentary on the news a few weeks back and it showed our military. they went into the hangar and the commander looked stressed beyond belief. he had to go to a museum to get parts for our plans for our guys to fly. or 20 years old, the planes are 30 years old. in other words, it is ridiculous that he has to go to the plane junkyards and museums to get parts for our plans when 200 abrams tanks and fighter jets are given to egypt a year or two ago. then, he said, this is not even my job, my job is to teach them
to fly. he said, they are supposed to be getting 18 hours. he said, they are getting four hours. i don't know about anybody listening, but i would not want to get on a plane with somebody with four hours flying time. this goes to the recurring question of military readinessnd military and have sometimes, as a result of the sequester, these mandatory across-the-board spending cuts that have been in effect for the last couple of years, how you can allocate money within that what needs to be spent. there are some parts of the military budget that are pretty fixed, so you can't necessarily upgrade everything as you would need to.
frankly, there have been some terrible failures in terms of developing new equipment. there are airplanes, there are helicopters that don't fly. some of the reasons we are using older military technology is because the replacements never really came online like they were supposed to. host: to both of you, there is a they that stemmed out past election, the future of the transpacific partnership and not much of a future if you read some stories. guest: i don't think there is a future for the tpp. i think it is dead. i know think will trump -- i don't think trouble try to push it or revive it. i think it is kind of a closed case. wouldn't you agree? guest: i would think so. one thing on which the president-elect has been fairly consistent on and he has not been consistent on everything, but trade has not been an issue of differing statements from
president-elect trump. he has been very consistent. the only way i think something like the transpacific partnership comes back even is something that restarts negotiations altogether. there is no way that the deal, ands, that i can see granted i've been wrong in predictions on this program before in the not too recent past, but as far as i can tell, there is no way the deal, as agreed to by the obama administration, ever comes back. host: that was already an issue among democrats and republicans both among the house and the senate. the election gives them cover to let this one go. guest: the thing that is so interesting is the democrats that supported this on the hill, like senator ron wyden, argued for super asleep that they had gotten -- argued that they have gotten the best deal they had ever gone before, that they had
taken into account complaints, that this was going to be the perfect deal. obviously, their arguments were not very convincing. host: darlene is in loma linda, california. darlene? caller: i'm right here. hello. host: go ahead. caller: i wanted to make a comment about obama care. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: ok. have said that obamacare created thousands of jobs. i had to go to three days of training and then be tested to pass to be a health care agent. the doctors got paid, people got taken care of, the hospitals got paid. i think that needs to be pointed out. thet: well, that gets to point that they would like to try to save some parts of obamacare. the questions are, which parts
are they going to save. what has been mentioned here already is the keeping people on their parents insurance policy until 26. and not having people with pre-existing conditions to be denied coverage. but those are two things and how much of it they are going to be keeping is not clear. and what is going to happen is not clear until the jobs situation is also not clear. would point out something interesting to me. i went on a trip to arizona where obamacare was ground zero, as part of the campaign raised between senator john mccain, the incumbent, and ann kirkpatrick, his challenger. saw the biggest collapse of the obamacare exchange system
in the country. for a while, it had one company -- county with no insurance companies on the exchange. medicaid expansion has worked very well to cover people in rural areas. to republicans and the republican head of a crisis and hel in a tiny town was arguing to keep medicaid expansion because that was helping him reduce the number of charity cases they were having to pay for. in washington, medicaid expansion is not something they want to do and many republican states have decided not to try medicaid expansion, but it was interesting to go to a republican state and have republicans in health care tell
me that medicaid expansion is one part of the law that is working. host: let's go to beachwood, ohio. david, good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for the topic and the knowledgeable speakers. for either or both of them, a question about what glimpses, what episodes of emergent cooperation among the different partisans and segments of the parties are they seeing in either the house or senate? a name withoute causing trouble for the individual. that onere, i think area, if i can pivot the to something that is going to be interesting to watch next year. one is how the civil liberties
coalition adapts to the presidency of donald trump. this is an informal contract -- cadre. often, we said it would be ron wyden, the democrat from oregon. rand paul, the republican just reelected to the senate in kentucky. people who have more libertarian or personal privacy leanings on issues like government incursionse and on into what your private life is your private life. i have a feeling that that group is going to be very active in the next coming months, as the trumpt ministration -- administration starts to get underway. you are hearing people talk about whether president trump will bring back the task --
tactic of waterboarding government detainees him of how much surveillance there might be , of restriction for journalists that are concerned about potential restrictions of first amendment and libel laws. i think that that group is going to have its work cut out for it in the coming months. guest: holding the line on those things. host: you two don't know it yet, but we have a camera located at the capital hilton here are new members are checking in. could you tell us a little bit about these new members and their inclusion in the house and senate and the challenges they will face? will start by saying that it is a very unusual thing for people who are not here on capitol hill. basically, we are having freshman orientation this week. this is like if you were going away to college and when you show up on your college campus
for the first time and you've got your suitcase and they are coming to show you around and show you how everything works, everything from health insurance to the way your life is going to be for the next two years, that is a lot of nuts and bolts. what happens this week if you are in the capital building, as we will be, is there is a lot of people who are wandering around, some of whom will literally be stopped by police officers because they are unfamiliar people walking out potentially without carrying the id that we always carry around. so, it is a a lot of logistics. it is an overwhelming experience. host: dave is in northport, new york, democrats line. caller: good morning, guys.
the agenda for the republican , the marketplace is interesting to look at, the financials. they have jumped last week because we will see a lot of deregulation. he is thish trump, businessman, he likes to load up companies with the debt and eventually goes bankrupt. , interest rates have also jumped in anticipation of a lot of debt, the government issuing a lot of debt, what do you think is going to happen with the debt ceiling coming up and how is that going to go? thet: that is million-dollar question, the trillion dollar question.
hard-line republicans are going to be using that for leverage to rein in government spending and to ratchet back the debt and make real progress on that issue. it remains to be seen how mr. trump will deal with that or how the republican leadership will deal with that. i have no idea how that is going to go down. it is potential for a huge fight. guest: i would say that the gentleman from long island has the million-dollar question this morning. and this is not a guess about how it will play out , it is more a guess about how it will play out and how it will end, is it time the democrats, given all the trouble that the republicans created really by votes there be democratic
when the democrats were in charge to me -- raise the debt ceilings and all the democratic votes they needed to raise the debt ceiling even when there was some republican control, the thing to watch for me is whether nancy pelosi, the democratic leader in the house, chuck schumer will be saying, we learned our lesson, we are never going to play games with the debt limit again. remember, they all said that it -- said that on the democratic side. democrats go back to playing games on their side because can speak ryan get 218 republican votes to raise the debt limit would be a good political issue for the democrats? even though it is really playing with fire, in terms of a policy question. this is lisa from
shreveport, louisiana. republican line. caller: hi pedro. anyway, i wanted to say this, please give me a chance. first off, i think you need to fix the health care system. my son is a diabetic and he needs health care. also, i would bring back tom coburn, put him in the cabinet. on the supreme court i would put someone like franklin graham. as far as the anarchists go, you put them on a helicopter and send them to syria. as far as that, i think everybody should boycott cnn. host: let me throw a tweet at you. flint michigan is going to be an issue of the lame-duck congress. guest: it remains to be seen if movement on that
in the lame-duck congress. there was supposed to be support fixing the water system and it is not clear if that should survive. guest: really good questions as that agreementot they are working on, on the flint situation and water infrastructure more generally, whether that will come through this year. actually, the water , if they willes get put in the package in the early part of the trumpet ministration. would be a thing you could take credit for without having much work on it if
it has not gone through yet. host: kathleen is joining us on the independent line from los angeles. caller: good morning. thank you, pablo. i want to say something it will take a little long. people, my people, black get the we do not issues. the issues are economic. already, president-elect trump is addressing issues that impact black america. ,mmigration, legal or not illegal or legal immigration black america loses 0.3% of their income. there has been a 700% increase in immigration since the 1970's. we have gone from $.67 against the white dollar to $.54 against
the white dollar. tpp is another issue that impacts black america. president-elect trump opposes it. it is dead in the water. the united auto workers is on nafta.ing race, whichsing on is what the democrats want us to focus on. guest: that is a very astute comment. race is exactly this question. do you have a minority driven agenda or are you trying to lift all boats and just see it as an economic problem. absolutely, the argument can be made that illegal immigration has hurt working blacks. the argument can also be made that trade has hurt
manufacturing industries where working blacks were employed. so, efforts to address these one could argue would naturally help black america. host: rod from toms river, new jersey. caller: good morning to your guests. to definition of insanity is impeach something that does not work and repeat it and expect different results. ronald reagan, trickle-down economics. george bush senior called them voodoo economics and he called did it.ame thing and he what is donald trump going to do? trickle-down economics on steroids! wake up, america. he is going to destroy the country. there is no question in my mind. i'm not a genius, but i know what i'm talking about.
they took over the country, they can't people. you have 40 governors out of the 50 states. you have the house of representatives, you've got the president. now they will put the supreme court. it is over. the republican party is going to run the country and they are going to destroy it. why are they going to destroy it? i have no idea. host: are republicans a rubberstamp for donald trump? question thathe is really going to be the question is whether or not, is whether that is the question or whether the inverse question is the question, whether trump turns out to be a rubberstamp for the ryan/mcconnell agenda that is already largely being drafted, though not in legislative language? the principles outlined by speaker ryan and the house republicans over the last several years and whether the
kevinform proposal that brady, the chairman of the ways and means committee were already working on, whether those proposals become essentially the trump agenda. one thing we know about the president-elect is that the president-elect is a high value on winning. you hear him talk about america needs to win again. one way to get a victory, if you are the president-elect and to is to do things that already have support on capitol hill or that will have support on capitol hill, so that you can hold a rose garden signing ceremony and claim victory. some of this becomes, i'm not entirely sure that we know yet who is going to be driving the agenda, if it is going to be -- but i think that winning is probably going to take precedence over a lot of other things. guest: that is a great question
about who is going to be driving the agenda. trump has proved himself to have his eye on the ball of the big issues, but we know he is not a developed a guy who does not care about the details -- he is not a policy guy who cares about the details. that gives bigger right and a chance to move on the details, that he celebrates about. it will be interesting to see if ryan has quite a bit of latitude. host: do you think a lot of that legislative activity happens in the first two years? guest: i think you have to take ryan at his word, they will go big, they will go bald, they will try to get as much done in these first two years as possible. is everything going to be through and through in the entire country?
the senate is still a sausage making body where it takes 60 votes to get most major legislation done. that requires democratic participation. you have divisions within the republican party, as well. we can't expect smooth sailing, everything is going to be everything that trump want in the next two years no problem. guest: well, but i would add to that that if the goal, if my theory about the president-elect about winning turns out to be correct, that also means that there will come times where he may end up be pushing ryan to , so theneed to win here house needs to take this deal that mitch mcconnell and chuck schumer worked out. i know it is not everything that , if you, but we need to want to build it needs to be signed into law, it needs to be something that schumer will
agree to. that is where the tension may be. it is what happens not on the front end. the house can have whatever it wants to. it is what happens when things get kicked back from the senate that i think we will see things get really interesting between the speaker and president trump. host: let's hear from one more call. hugh from illinois. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call, pedro. my question is what would happen to planned parenthood with regard to donald trump getting elected as president of this country? host: planned parenthood. what: well, we know republicans want, which is not to have planned parenthood funded. .hen you run again into that
the defending of planned parenthood is something the democrats will fight tooth and nail and will use the filibuster to try to prevent. guest: true, but the other thing is is that there is also this effort underway on the other side to make the height amendment permanent law. this is the restriction on federal funding of abortion services that has been in effect for decades now, but it has to be revived every year. perfunctory, we all kind of know it is always going to be there. the democratic platform calls for taking it out, to the dismay of some of the antiabortion minority in the democratic party , but i think that question will be back on the table again. as well as with the planned
parenthood question. our guests today joining us talking about not only the issues that congress faces, but the future of president elect donald trump. niels lesniewski from "rollcall." also, francine kiefer from "christian science mon eighting up in about minutes, we will have it live for your new eastern on c-span. republican national committee chief of staff katie walsh and other senior rnc seniors will hold a postelection briefing today. they will discuss that in a
postelection briefing. c-span enamel have that in about half an hour. paulolitico is reporting ryan formally announced he is seeking another term as speaker of the house. the opportunity to turn trump's into progress for america. if you go big and bold, we can offer our children even more than it offers us. paul ryan and the current leadership team is expected to be reinstalled during a closed door meeting of the republican house congress tomorrow. speaking of ryan and other republican leadership candidates, they will speak to members at a forum today. tomorrow's elections are private. democrats are scheduled to elect their leadership thursday. orientation sessions for 50 foreign you house members will get underway today. they, along with six new
senators, will be part of the hundred 15th congress. here is more. take their positions next year, joining us to walk us through what happens to these newly minted members of congress is bradford fitch of the congressional management foundation. guest: good morning. host: could you tell us a little bit about your foundation and its role? guest: we are about to enter our 40th year. we wanted more assistance in the management, the running of these small businesses that is what they are. 435 small businesses. we have added an element of citizen engagement training. now there are thousands of americans that go to our training event that learn how congress works. we help congress try to do a better job of engaging and interacting with citizens. we help citizens do a better job of understanding and interacting with congress. if we do our job right, but are laws are made.
host: tell us what goes on for those newly elected numbers of congress. houston do they start training, and what will they learn? they started their training the morning after they got elected. there is really no break after you get elected to the house and senate. we turn on the firehose the morning after. it is a difficult and challenging task to set up a congressional office. i was chief of staff for a freshman member of the house of representatives if you years ago. i felt like there were all the headaches of starting a small business with all the red tapes of starting a bureaucracy. they have to get staff, offices, and a jerk. it is like running a small business. they have to think it through, and at the same time make policy decisions and come up with different positions that they did not have before. maybe they came from the state legislature and had some
positions on local issues, but now they have to have a position and opinions on a iranian nuclear deal climate change, or an infrastructure bill. it presents a policy challenge and an operational challenge. host: from now until they are seated in congress next year, do they come to washington and stay for that education? is it done in several steps? how does that work? guest: congressman do it a little different. the orientation starts for the new members tomorrow. they will be here on tuesday. they going to meetings with current members of congress. they meet with the institutional staff. they find out everything from what are the operational roles i have to work by, to what are the ethics rules, which are stringent and very transparent that they have to learn. they get a lot of education from
mentors. members of congress will turn to other people and their delegation, their party, and they will try to get a little bit of what happened to you experience. that happens for the next couple of weeks while they are in washington. then they will go back home and get sworn in in early january. get their do they office, when do they start hiring staff? give us those details. guest: members of congress don't officially get the keys to their office until they are officially sworn in, probably january 4 this year. they do not get office space or official tools to do hiring or sign contracts the united states senate provides each senator elect one staff member. the house members don't get any staff. they have to do this from volunteers and campaign staff. host: bradford fitch with the
congressional management foundation. what doe let you go, you think is the most important lesson for an incoming member of congress? not, it iseve it or being disciplined in what you want to do. most members of congress really want to change the world. they want to do everything. you really cannot do that. if you want to change the world, you have to run for president. you can maybe do two or three things as a member of the house of representatives. if you don't have a strategic plan, they will become one of two types of members. if they are in a safe congressional district, they will become ineffective. if they are in an unsafe district, they will become a former member. accomplish a few things, and the voters will usually reward you. host: --
you look at what uber is doing, you see the proclamations automated executives are doing. in the automated is this, we are used to a lot of hype. when it comes to everyday matters, a little bit of marketing hype is ok. when it comes to matters such as this, it is a little disingenuous. because words are flippantly thrown around. someone says "autonomous," "autopilot," "self driving." i think, as we all know, that is not the case. >> watch "the communicators," tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span 2.
republican donald trump is elected as the next president of the united states. and the nation elect's republican-controlled u.s. house and senate. followed the tradition of government on c-span. we will take you to key events as they happen without interruption. watch live on c-span. watch on-demand on c-span.org. or listen on our free c-span radio app. >> homeland security second jay johnson, state and local government officials, and private industry representatives will be talking about the conditions of u.s. infrastructure and the need for its upkeep and modernization. president-elect trump has said he wants to make infrastructure spending a top priority in his administration. secretary johnson should be arriving shortly. live coverage here on c-span.