tv U.S. House of Representatives Legislative Business CSPAN November 16, 2016 2:00pm-4:01pm EST
raising the debt ceiling? guest: there has not been in opposition to raising the debt ceiling -- if there is a plan. we continue to raise a debt like having a 30 year mortgage and saying now i have a 40 year mortgage, now i have a 50 your mortgage. you are never making the payments to pay it down. if we have a plan to pay it down, we understand the deficit -- the debt ceiling will increase in the short run to bring in better fiscal policy. host: and in florida. in florida. a republican. good morning. caller: there is so much, so many things going on lately. c-span is wonderful. i just can't get over how wonderful you guys are. first of all, i would like to say something in my opening
year or thislast year before the election when the caucus that i'm forgetting which caucus shut down the house and had the private telephone with nancy pelosi -- was at the black caucus that the that? -- that did that? host: are you talking about this in an over gun issues? caller: yes. we watched it on c-span. can you address something like that ever happening again? that whole scenario seems very bizarre. since you are on the transportation, the situation regarding building the wall and all that -- i watched on c-span about the weeklong program they did on immigration issues. can't wait tax that huge incoming infrastructure down there a little bit more to pay
for the wall? it is huge, the trucks daily that come through that area. are segmented we did in laredo to talk about the trade. -- our segment we did in laredo. guest: there is an unbelievable amount of trade that comes across our southern border. i've been addressing that from a visa and national security standpoint and i was surprised to see 82 million different transfers back and forth across the southern border on an annual basis. it is a significant amount. as we look at that come apart of what president-elect trump has talked about in his nap the renegotiation is looking at -- as we look at that, part of what
president-elect trump has talked about in his nafta renegotiation is looking at that. to pretend to speak on behalf of the new administration coming in as they look at that. but i do know that he is committed to renegotiating nafta. it is not just with regards to the border security wall. as we look at those components, how do we paper that -- pay for lookingnumber of us are at appropriating money right away to start the construction. the american people want to see something happen. the second part of that was about the city and -- the sit in as it related to the democrats protesting the lack of initiatives on gun control in light of what happened in orlando. that was a violation of house --es as we start to see that
there were fundraising off of that. see some real penalties and consequences that come as a result of those who were fundraising off of that. you could actually have a reprimand from the house ethics committee. there would also be other areas that could potentially be a violation -- we have rules that say we cannot use official duties to be able to raise money. even making a phone call come i cannot do that in my office if it is campaign related because and thetes the ethics federal election laws as we start to look at that. some of that will be addressed. we have additional rules that we will be passing here very shortly. i know that speaker ryan has worked with his colleagues on the other side of the aisle to
strengthen those to make sure the decorum of the house is followed the way that it should be. host: we are getting further thatfrom the sit in happen. when you expect the penalties to come down? guest: you would think if you were going to address it -- some of the people will be leaving. anything that would have to be addressed would need to be addressed in this congress. any rules that go fourth would be for future congresses. and he consequences would have to be addressed in the coming days. north carolina, gutierrez is an independent. caller: i'm calling to let you this pasthat presidential election was stolen in places like michigan, arizona, north carolina, ohio. these were republican held states.
due to suppression and the purging of the vote, the republicans were successful in winning the general election. we need to get rid of the electoral college. the last two elections have been stolen through corruption that's going on within these elections. like my vote -- my boat has been stolen twice out of the lasix seniors. that isn't right. has been stolen twice out of the last 16 years. that isn't right. people are out here protesting because they feel like their vote has been stolen. this election was stolen by the republicans. host: what do you say to that concern? guest: making sure that we have
proper voting to be able to do that is key. of our voting system is key. having lost anse election with fraud. i was in selma, north carolina with president-elect tromp in your area seven or -- president each wrote in your ar seven or eight hours away from where i live. place ire cars and cannot imagine there were that many people that will show up. as we looked at that, all of us needed to standup whether we are democrat, unaffiliated or republican against voter fraud. what i found as many people do not exercise the privilege. for example,lina,
60% of people registered to vote voted. you have a good 32% of people who could have shown up at made a difference. it is more apathy than voter suppression of from. host: north of chicago, john is a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning, congressman meadows. if you have a pencil there so you can jot this down. i'm hoping to get your response to both of these. i've like to mention something about the last caller. itfirst comment/question of, i read it that president-elect trump was going to put his business interests is as you probably has more than any president would have had, puts it those interests and he has of his children. he feels that is a blind trust, which is bizarre.
it sounds like he is asking for security clearance for his 2 eldest sons. you have to wonder, why. number 2, the people responsible for making profits in his companies are also going to have globalto situation about and national information. that is the first thing. i what is it that your feelings on the potential for scandal. term -- thise the is what the americans want. the americans clearly wanted this. to realize that many studies have looked at as shown in congress, which you are part of, there is no statistical correlation with weather 50% or more of americans want a piece of legislation or not. the currentple is
state of marijuana. to the last caller, i do not think he was talking so much about fraud, he may not be able to put it this way. people in wyoming, many red states are small states. people in wyoming to get three electoral votes. each of those represent about 165,000 people. in california, each electoral vote represents 700,000 people. in wyoming, each voter like that, their voter has 3.5 times of the purchasing power than the california. aboutind of thing talking it being great. i do not want to get rid of the electoral college. -- that kind of thing talking about it. very insightful analysis. let me hit at the second one
first and then the blind trust. the electoral college aspect. if indeed, there are a lot of people every year that we have an election, every four years, people say we needed to get rid of it and go straight with the popular vote. if we did that and taking your analogy, essentially the inpaigning would happen three states. it would happen in california and new york and texas. the rest of the country, perhaps, would be left out of all of that. , there were ait lot of campaign and probably 10 or 12 swing states as we saw the election, to a close. -- come to a close. even the campaigning then it gets into population centers around new york city, perhaps
around chicago and illinois if you added in. and around los angeles, these mega-urban centers. that is not really representative of the country as a whole. system, thet the best system we have to make sure both majorities and minorities that, voice and as we see if you look at a map and you can see what states voted for what, you can see that in this election from a popular vote standpoint, hillary clinton is leading in the popular vote. it looks like she will have won the popular vote. if you look at the blue areas that she wanted compare -- won, compare to the red parts across the state, it is very different and illuminating in terms of the pockets of where the votes came from. it is important that every state, every citizen has it.
your point is valid in making sure it is fair in terms of representation. let me get back to the blind trust. one of the things as a member of congress i found when i got here is i ended up having to -- i was in the real estate business. i have to not only divest my interest,ut to the there was a potential conflict of interest aspect. putting assets and running a blind trust is something not only president-elect trump is committed to do but it becomes difficult to do. he has such a vast holdings and given those to his children. it is not just there, a lot of accountability in terms of the ethics requirements, financial disclosures, every quarter we are feeling doubt. there is a number of watchdog groups. -- filling out. in on conflicts in
regards to insider trading. we have to make sure we hold and in the blind trust because he has so much knowledge of what is going on. the longer he is in office, the less he will know about any in turn runnings about that. host: an option for you are your colleagues to turn over business to your children? it is now. for example, i couldn't turn it over to my children or wife, in terms of a business. -- i could turn it over to my children or wife, in terms of a business. is there are ethics or lost that come into that. if it is in my wife's or ,hildren's name for paperwork as they frown on that. in fact, it is fraudulent so you cannot do that. not only a paper transaction, it
is truly he will have to divest himself of the decision-making. ofnow there will be a number -- i have actually talked to president-elect trump before he was elected. he is committed to this country. the interview the other night where he is not going to take a -- i have never heard of that. that speaks to the heart of who he is to make sure he serves this country and the best way cap. to silveride of d.c. spring, maryland. good morning. joseph, are you with us? caller: yet. -- yeah. i was listening to the previous caller. the one about voter fraud. public a lot of the should be involved in the voting process.
, you docandidate lost not have to protest. i do not know why they are protesting. they lost clearly. iso, the electoral map [indiscernible] state-by-state and my question for the congressman to how is congress going work with the president-elect? i think really what it is going to require is to make sure we hit in the ground running. the other part of that is to take of those four or five we areies and make sure ready for that. i will give you one and this will probably prompted some calls on the repeal and replacement of obamacare. very passionate on both sides. we are working right now to do
the work in a committee so in the first couple of weeks when we, back, we can put before the vote not only a repealing the also a replacement to vote as well. as we look at that and get it to the senate, we are working on a to provide a tool to allow a lower threshold in the senate so we do not run into a 60 vote closure issue. you are going to see a whole lot of front end work to do that. willnk the first 100 days be the most productive we have seen in modern history. when you get beyond that, that is when some of the differences kle that how you tac strategically and make it work. there is a lot of interest in a real way.
to people who may not have voted for donald trump in congress to get our economy moving again a making sure national security is paramount. i, for one am committed to working and the halls of congress to make sure we have a good plan. thank you for your comments on the electoral college and how it works. host: jill is a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. my question for the representative and all the ,egislature in washington is how are you going to pay for it? you keep talking about raising the the debt ceiling. , how areese policies we going to pay for the wall? how are we going to pay? please be specific. i am so tired of the rhetoric of, oh, well, we will have to reach across the aisle. how are we going to pay for all of these policies?
guest: jill, thank you so much. a lot of people talk in general relatives. let me be specific. i can probably speak to that better because on one of my subcommittees and we of look at that. it has been a conversation that i've had with the john delaney of maryland who is a democrat. inand i have talked, we came at the same time four years ago. we talked about in infrastructure bank and whether or not we do that. some of the payment there on infrastructure can of the look that terms of repatriation of earnings in some of our corporations are abroad. i do not want to suggest i am setting national policy here on c-span this morning. you asked for specific and here is one of the ideas. we can look at the $2.4
trillion, some suggest it is that are abroad in foreign earnings that are being invested their -- there and provide of vehicle for those two come back at a much reduced or zero tax to get them back to the united states. all for that as a vehicle to ,erhaps provide a stimulus which would be the largest stimulus we have ever seen in terms of the economic bone -- boon and have that where it is invested back in infrastructure. whether it is invested in infrastructure or other capital improvements is a decision that will be made by the president-elect and vice president-elect and their cabinet. and then confirmed by senate and congress. that is one of the specific areas that we have that. i know president-elect trump has talked about the wall and doing that in terms of either a
transportation tariffs as it comes across the southern border that one of the previous caller's talked about. all of that will have to be debated. there are other vehicles besides increasing taxes. the other thing is this. when we get back to a 4% gdp growth, which would be a healthy but robust economic growth, what we will see is tax revenues go up. we have seen that throughout history. we will see additional dollars that will come in on the normal cost or rates we have right now. at that, it will provide a little bit of relief in those areas that have been very, very tough to stretch of the dollar. a great question. the devil is in the details. weeds on how we
do it. we will a debate at that in the first 90 days for sure. calling. for host: as the policies get put into place, a lot of folks on people donald trump picks to surround himself with as he implements the policies. i am sure you saw harry reid on the senate floor, his comments about donald trump's political advisor, steve bannon. here's the story in "the washington post be bank -- washington post." do you know steve bannon, personally? guest: i know him personally. we do not have a long relationship which i find is interesting. one of the things i can say is i serve on the foreign affairs committee, the middle east subcommittee. the reason i asked for that is my love for israel and the
jewish people. am inou look at where i terms of my particular point of view, i will be speaking in new york on anti-semitism and the rise of it in our world and how we need to not only condemn that but how we needed to fight to that. some of the comments made about stephen bannon do not represent who he is as an individual. theink that is one of travesties that any pick you will get over the next 30 days is going to be met with resistance. steve bannon -- host: how did you get to know him? guest: on the campaign trail. we had numerous visits to north carolina. we were there in selma with the donald trump and his team. here is an individual who is not and more soft-spoken
analytical in the way that he does that. but really brings out the best in those people around him. i think that has been the fascinating thing is to see the way they have worked on the team. when you have reince priebus and steve bannon willing to work together and complement each --er the hunted their backs behind in their backs. when the cameras weren't rolling , it makes for a great team. what we sometimes do is look at the diversity of opinion and start to criticize that. racism, those kind of things being alleged in minette the headlines have no type of business and any administration. i know steve bannon would agree. host: a couple of minutes left with congressman mark meadows. a republican, good morning. caller: good morning at thank you for taking the call. i have a couple of quick comments and 2 quick questions.
host: may not have time, can you pick one? caller: i hope the republican side do not blow it as bad as george w. bush's who passed on to trillion dollars -- $2 trillion. the questions i have, i looked taxresident-elect trump's plan and i voted for trump and support him early on. i see for my tax bracket i get a 3% reduction in taxes. to 25%.28% down i would like to ask the congressman about paul ryan speakership. if you go online and you go to is anart.com, there article that says basically 76% of all democrats support paul ryan and only 34% of republican
support. i would like to put the congressman on the hot seat, do support paul ryan? caller: thank you for putting me on the hot seat. yesterday, paul ryan was nominated by our republican conference. they key is as long as paul ryan's agenda is that of the american people and really wanting to make sure those agendas are first and foremost, which he has articulated and support, i am going to support our leadership. the minute it goes a different direction, we are in a situation where it is not supporting those things important to you in washington or anybody else, moms and dads across the country, we need to make sure we keep our focus there. we also needed to make sure as we look at this, we do not grow government and we do not fumble the football.
it is time we bring it into the end zone and make sure we hold the government accountable to the american people. i am not sure what to the other focused ons, was that. host: that is ok. we are running out of time. the wife that caller. -- chris thank you for the time. host: we are joined by congresswoman brenda lawrence, democrat from the detroit area. i want to start with michigan and donald trump's victory in the electoral college for a state of that was supposed to be part of the blue wall and has voted democrat in presidential elections for over 2 decades. what happened in michigan? guest: a lot of people are asking that question. michigan was reflective of what happened across the country. whitewas a segment of the that income population
typically are not polled were considered in elections that really came out. i know i won my district for hillary clinton, but to the people have spoken. we are doing a lot of analysis and what is the democratic message? host: do you consider what happened in michigan a donald trump victory or a hillary clinton loss? focus the creditor victory? guest: i see it as a hillary clinton loss. the people i know, i've ran statewide as lieutenant governor. when i talk to the people in michigan and know their issues, i think they were given the other candidate a shot. as they do not hear their voice or see their place. they went with the alternative. host: would a better message from hillary clinton would've helped in michigan?
guest: obviously, we have to do something different because our in,, the whites, the lower have been our base for decades. -- lower income have been our base for decades. why did they leave us? it is something we are analyzing. i'm committed to working with the democratic party because our core values and what we believe in it and fight for represent -- all of the citizens of this great country. but this segment did not stay with us. that is a wake-up call for us. we heard a loud and clear. host: opening the phones from callers. congresswoman brenda lawrence for about half an hour. democrats (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. and independence, (202) 748-8002
. you said we have to do something different, does it mean different leadership of the democratic party? beenrship roles have pushed later this month, are you looking for change at the top? changei am looking for in direction. i have a lot of faith in our current leadership. , wecurrent leadership is cannot continue to operate a message the same way. we have an opportunity here to not lay down and cry about what happened. the people spoke. when they speak, we should listen. what is the desire of the democratic party? to be a voice and fight for those who are sometimes left out. well the history of being the voice of conscious -- conscien
ce. host: the black caucus is a powerful voting bloc. guest: we are larger now. host: what are you hear from your colleagues? guest: my colleagues have been very involved in the leadership and the direction of the democratic party. we are very much engaged in the looking at, will our new leadership that we elect or reelect be able to be comprehensive to stand to make adjustments in the direction we are going? to be able to lead. this is something that is very telling about a trump administration. the democratic party has a responsibility to be the voice of so many people. if you go on his election are not included in the trump vision
seeing it not represented and the predilection of his administration. though voice and power of the black caucus, we call ourselves the conscience of congress. to be extremely important. host: are there other names that interest you, a couple of weeks away from the election, somebody else you are looking doubtful could possibly? guest: no, i have not been given any other names, but with been in a clear dialogue with our current administration leadership that we have been in a clear dialogue with our current administration leadership that we cannot continue to do things at the same way. host: an independent. good morning. caller: everybody keeps saying mr. trump does not have a mandate. that whendy remembers
president obama was elected, the american people gave him a mandate in both houses. a super majority, gave him two years to do anything he wanted to. host: i think we lost to david. does president trump has a mandate? guest: i hope that is a mandate that i heard, the rhetoric i heard it through the campaign is not the mandate. that is not the america i know. it is very concerning to me. continues totrump the candidate trump with his divisive and racist and sexist agenda that is not the mandate of america. and absolutely not. that is why his administration is a little unsettling because what is going to be his agenda?
he says the agenda, the rhetoric he used to get elected will not reflect upon his administration. people who know him say that is not the donald trump is that we will see as president. we do not know. host: i want to get your thoughts on some of the protests. the front page of a paper out of michigan. one of the signs held up by one of the students who attended. yesterday, here in washington, there were thousands, thousands of young people from high schools who walked and protested. something to that has been very telling and i hope donald trump really sees the young people, the millennials, they do not embrace racism.
they do not embrace stereotypes. sos new generation is so -- loving and accepting of different people. it is unacceptable to them. hate,e the love trumps they are not talking about foreign policy. as are talking about how you treat people that are emotionally differ from you. how do you bring people to the table? how do you create equality in america? there is a major concern that this president-elect must address. host: let's go to republican. linda, good morning. caller: i am going to go on to say -- she is still talking. this is the thing i have to say. i was a democrat and i changed to republican. one of this election started, it proved to me every reason why i changed.
every single, solitary reason i changed. we are sick and tired of this wall not being built and immigration people are just blatantly, the president on down, ignoring people comic care, breaking the law. it is the law, you do not come here, you get in line. -- ignoring people coming here, breaking the law. you do not get 40, free, free forever. we are sick and tired of it. 60 yearsrked, i am old, i will work until i'd i. i am sick and tired of these young kids just like you saw that have been babied from the time they are little. it is not about love so much. uneducated about
what it really takes to run a ,ountry, to have safety security, job security. there's a lot going on in this lovingnd not just about and hating people. i am a christian. i love people. i will tell you what i do not love -- i do not love when people are breaking the law and everybody in congress is fighting up there like the democrats fighting for the wall. the ugly things that are saying about trump that is a racist and of your termsick that you throw out. people are sick of it. host: a couple of issues. guest: thank you for calling. let me address immigration. president obama has deported more criminals and illegal immigrants than any other president on record. the democratic administration has clearly embraced if you are
a criminal in the united states and you are not a citizen, you will be deported. secondly, the wall, the concept of a wall, how is he going to build it, who will pay for? versusg a wall increasing the budget for ice, for customs is more of a priority than me down a wall. young people, every generation, will do find this country. i am a baby boomer. we were very concerned about medicare, social security, national security. it is not a good thing for america to discount to the voice of this next generation who will be eventually rolling and making this -- ruling and making decisions. is is this a generation that has been given more than me as a
baby boomer? who have to work for everything i got? and understand the value of hard work? -- and understand the value of hard work? this will be the next generation. who will be making decisions? --t: this on the front page washington times. illegal immigrants prepared to ask president obama to part of 750,000 dreamers, saying is the last best hope. leaders are planning a rally today in new york. september, immigrants had been approved for obama's program that grants young adults illegal immigrants a two-year stay of deportation. something you think president obama should do? guest: i think he shall look at
it. we are not talking about criminals. we are not talking about people who are here -- as are dreamers. their people -- parents brought them here. they do not have a legal status. talkoubles me when we about immigration, is the only thing we talk about the wall. why haven't we as a country policy?hed immigration this has been something i have been asking for since i've been in congress. until we get a policy we can enforce, it is all over the place. president obama was criticized because he enforced some executive orders because of that was in lieu of nothing. we need immigration plans. how do we deal with the influx of immigrants into our country who want to stay here? some of them working. we criticize immigrants and then we employ them. how many of these immigrants are
actually building and our new construction and landscaping. have skills and tell us they bring from their other countries, but we have a backlog and when it comes to processing people for citizenship in this country because we do not have the staffing. we do not have policies that we are enforcing. , a wall, ito a point do not know the value of that. i know there is extreme value in establishing and i hope donald trump who is a made immigration a major part of his campaign, i order to comee forward and make it immigration plan so that we in america has an expectation. people are having to make decisions or criticism about
people here in this country who are law abiding when it's they are here. some are being born in this country, their parents are not citizens. we need to address of that. to label people with as wide brush when we know sometimes as they are living in our neighborhoods, working in jobs and we are hiring them. host: your home state michigan, andrea is walking -- waiting. democrat am a register but i did vote republican. i have been disappointed in the representation even for my own congressperson brenda lawrence. i voted on the platform and i do not see how -- what is the biggest issues in addition to immigration is abortion. how we are breaking people over here but killing millions of
babies. i am a christian also. i want to know how with a straight face the democratic party can support the planned parenthood. they tried to started off as women's health issues. i am talking specifically on abortion. hillary was for full-term and partial-birth abortion. i have been very disappointed and that is one of the main reasons that donald trump won overwhelmingly. we have lost all morals and respect for life. i think that was the biggest thing. evangelists came out of more than ever before this time in the election. and i wish the democratic party what stop making excuses. people rioting. there is nothing wrong with protesting. they are burning and hanky the things of donald.
i think it is plain why don't want. hangingare burning and things of donald. caller: -- guest: i have been your mayor and am currently your congresswoman. some people make political decisions based on one issue. i've heard a number of people say it was based on gay rights and abortion. i am a christian as well. amazinggiven me 2 children i was able to give birth to. i have never considered an abortion. but i've never been raised, i've never been a victim of incense. -- myr had to look at husband and i say the choice between my life and the baby's life. for anyone when who has to the
issue in their life, i want them to be able to make a decision. i wanted them to have that choice. i do not apologize for that. i am not in favor of abortion just for recreational purposes, i changed my mind kind of thing. whereare clear examples women must have this decision about her own body. we do not legislate that men have vasectomy's. we do not legislate man who use viagra. we are very comfortable legislating what do with their bodies and their decisions that today mate. there are discussions about women not having a birth control. this is a slippery slope. i am notarenthood, going to apologize for my support. they have been in areas and given women health care in areas where there was nothing else for them.
that 1% of what they do our abortion, as a women have areasy babies in rural where they do not have any other care. they screen for breast cancer. there are hospitals, health care .ystem that provide abortions but look at all of the health care they provide in people's lives and to give healthy births. the support of all of my constituents but i am not going to say that i am foot and my issue. i feel very strongly about a woman's right to choose and i will continue to support that. if donald trump received votes questionngle issue, i the voter. there were so many other issues. if you are african-american and your child is subject to stop and frisk or you are a muslim
and you are now being called a terrorist or a hispanic and immigration issues, but you do not care about anything that happens your family or the community at large or you have daughters and that rhetoric did not mean anything to you, you are voting for one single issue. that is your right. i look at the whole candidate. i look at all of those issues to make my decisions. host: daniel is waiting. and independent. caller: good morning. thank you, congresswoman for your service. i will keep it easy on you. i am independent and i voted for the first time in my life, i voted for neither one of the candidates. i had a right in candidate and i voted for rand paul. the question i have for you, i heard you say that the democrats -- i changed my party from democrat to libertarian and now
i'm independent. one of the things you said was democrats are for all people. midwest handshe down voted for donald trump, it and white racism. when you say you want to bring the country together, how do you address that? and second is california. to change it like total popular vote and introduce legislation. how can you bring that when you have california that we know for a fact that has well over 500,000 undocumented illegals, whatever you want to call them, illegal aliens, but you have to change that for rhetoric? with all of those people in
mexico that camera mexico flag, i would like your answer. when you say you are trying to bring america together, california is not the united states of america. until we get a hold of illegal citizens, however you want to do it, that is what matters. i thank you for your service and being humble and i know you will do big things in congress. i agree with a lot of your message. host: let the congresswoman answer. i have numbers in front of me from a story today about illegal immigrants in the state of california. almost 25% of the nation's immigrants stay in california. with an undocumented population of almost eight -- 815,000. los angeles has more than any county in the state.
guest: first of all, let's talk electoral versus the popular vote. you should know the history of water we established the electoral vote. part of what day you talked ,bout is that if we do that certain parts of the country will have a greater influence on the outcome of the election. it was established, the intent was to make sure every state has an equal vote in the process. we are looking at that now. we have 2 candidates. one won the popular and one won the electoral. i am not opposed to looking data. i am concerned about making sure that every state has an equal voice. let's talk about the state of
california is clearly part of the united states. ofcalifornia, who has a lot agricultural industry, it is interesting to me how we undocumented but we employ them. are we going to put a penalty on all of those companies who hire and employee these individuals who are here in america? that is something i think should be on the table as well. sayinger thing about bringing to this country i see demo trump as an opportunity after one of the worst elections i have seen in my lifetime. inhave debated issue so hard the pre-presidential election. andthen we come together
with them the policies and what we want for our country. we have been so off-track in talking about the rhetoric of women, hispanics, immigrants, we ever not talked a lot about policy. donald trump has an opportunity, he said it tonight -- the night of the election that he will be a president of all people. that means you respect the fact that half of this country or more than half are women and women should be treated equally. you have to respect the fact that there are different religions in the united they and you must respect to that. you must have a comprehensive immigration plan for all of these individuals who are coming and are a part of our communities every day. every immigrant is not a criminal. you are going to have to lead mr. president-elect to make sure
we move this country forward. if you truly do not want to govern on what you campaign on, you are going to have to show us what you do. host: one more call. mike is waiting in wisconsin, a republican. caller: i wonder if you can comment, you mentioned before the statistics. it is amazing because of media machine and the 2 parties are using the same logic that cause them both to miscalculated election. i called in a couple of months of one the discussion secretary clinton passed through the fbi investigation. determinedit was that no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges. the process moved forward. my question is, we look at these protesters, primarily
millennials, and i wonder if that is the bloc that through the election. they feel disenfranchised by how the dnc treated the candidate that statistically they supported. i am not quite sure we say the dnc, the dnc he was support of hillary clinton. supporthe dnc was in of hillary clinton. a lot went into investigation of hillary clinton. it was frustrating to me to watch because i sat on the oversight committee. and i repeatedly saw the questions being asked and pooling and the fbi director because he did not render the decision that republicans out he showed. and to watch them in the middle of election come and put out a off so manyat threw people and vote and came back and retracted it.
that fbi director is questionable in his ability to lead. let's talk about, we now have a president-elect that has two hearings, two criminal hearings or trials, court dates. who had beenate cleared of any criminal activity. they said it was not the smartest thing to do with the best decision to make but nothing criminal. this country has a lot to look at in how we evaluate and what we are placing on our candidates here. donald trump has some criminal allegations he must address. he is our president-elect going into office. host: will have to end it there would cong
>> well, later today, representatives meadows and lawrence and their house colleagues will reconvene for deliberations and votes. right now the house is in recess so republican members can gather to discuss possible rule changes for the 115th session of congress which gavels in in january. the house will be back around 5:00 p.m. eerp for procedural votes on two bills. they'll then debate legislation that would prohibit u.s. financial institutions from facilitating the sale of airplanes to iran. live coverage of the house here on c-span when they gavel back in. hillary clinton will be honored tonight for her contributions to child advocacy by the children's defense fund. it's her first public appears since the election. c-span2 will have live coverage of that starting at 8:00 eastern. and from "politico" recently. russ mussen who headed up the nato alliance from 2009 until two years ago plabs to meet for president-elect trump's transition team later this
month here in washington. quote, we have to acknowledge that the foreign and policy team is not well-known, he said. mr. russ mussen sent a letter of congratulations to mr. trump saying he was optimistic that the administration will strengthen ties despite donald trump's questioning of nato's readvances and saying -- read more about this in "politico" today. kellyanne conaway, a senior advisor to the trump presidential transition team spoke to reporters a short time ago in new york city about the transition and plans for donald trump to hold a news conference. [inaudible] kellyanne: i was in d.c. at the transition office and it's something to see everybody from seasoned -- [inaudible]
and then to look around the room to see millennials when president reagan left office. >> [inaudible] kellyanne: it doesn't seem that way. those are false. >> [inaudible] kellyanne: no. just having dinner with his family. he enjoyed himself. >> [inaudible] kellyanne: shortly, i would say, sometime soon. obviously he's talking to heads of state and members of -- possible members of his cabinet and filling out his senior leadership team. a lot of activity going on upstairs. i know he looks forward to addressing all of you. not sure it will be today but it will be soon. it's a lot to digest and putting together a federal government is a big task. >> [inaudible] kellyanne: they're all a priority to him. >> [inaudible] kellyanne: i haven't talked to them about that. >> [inaudible] kellyanne: we haven't talked about that.
i think he has been very clear on his position on that issue. >> [inaudible] kellyanne: no. but they are very productive meetings. senior members of congress, heads of state, outside advisors, people helping him with transition. well, you know, these are very serious issues, very serious appointments, very serious considerations and i was reading "politico" earlier and noticed that we're pretty much on track to where other administrations have been. definitely internal in terms of vetting different candidates and thinking through and interviewing different people and that will just continue. it's not the kind of thing to rush through. >> [inaudible] kellyanne: it is. well, vice president-elect mike pence, is the number two person
in our federal government and people in d.c. were very happy to have him there and talking to him. also, i think in terms of transition, we have all the different issues set in place and many different people working on those. . there was a hive of activity in d.c. yesterday. and all of those issues and individuals are being properly vetted and addressed as we speak. we feel really good about transition. i actually would just say it's false to say it's not going well. everything is very smooth. i know the president-elect himself, i talk to him regularly, he's very happy with how the transition is going from his perspective, he's been presented with any number of choices within each of the agencies and departments and he's making those tough decisions. obviously more choices than one to fill in each position. we have and embarrass ament of riches when it comes to. that
reporter: who you -- how is he feeling? [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] >> follow the transition of governmenten -- government on c-span as donald trump become the 45th president of the united states. and republicans maintain control of the u.s. house and senate. we'll take to you key events as they happen, without interruption. watch live on c-span. watch on-demand at cspan.org or listen on our free c-span radio app. >> thank you all very much. welcome to congress. >> kellyanne conaway and former new york city mayor rudy giuliani talked about the presidential transiggets and donald trump's economic, foreign policy and trade agendas. these conversations were part of a "wall street journal" event earlier this week.
[applause] >> thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. hope you enjoyed dinner. we're going to get straight into the real meat of the evening. i can't imagine a better way to start than to have someone who is very familiar to all of you, someone who's played an extraordinarily important role in this nation's history, america's mayor, of course, as he was known, someone who a has also played an increasingly important role in the trump campaign. so, without further ado, let's get straight to it. please welcome senior advisor to the trump campaign and now vice chairman of the transition team for president-elect trump, mayor rudy giuliani. [applause] mr. giuliani: thank you very much, thanks. mr. baker: to start, mr. mayor, i can still call you mr. mayor. mr. giuliani: absolutely.
forever. can still do wedings. mr. baker: in a few more weeks, though, we'll have to change the address, general, or maybe mr. secretary. mr. giuliani: one never knows. mr. baker: i want to come on to that, some trfting possibilities that may await you in the trump administration. let me start, if i may, with giving -- i'd like you to give us your sense of what the -- what the immediate agenda is for the trump presidency. in particular i want to ask, we've seen this fascinating election campaign in which president-elect trump won in large part by expressing -- by tapping into this very populist sentiment that's out there in the country, and -- but he won as a republican. you've got a republican congress. you got a republican house, republican senate. how is that going to play itself out? how's the populist moment, the
populist insurgency and that that's driven president-elect trump and the republicans in congress, how is that going to work out? what kind of policies are we going to see? mr. giuliani: i think you're going to see very much the policies he talked about. i don't think that's the hard part. so i anal jies this election to the election of 1824. when andrew jackson defeated what was basically the almost emerging nobility of america, which were the revolutionary americans, right down to, you know, adams jr., and all of a sudden the american people had had enough of this elite core and decided we needed somebody who represented us. and represented, meaning the people. so i think that's what happened here. i think the people revolted against what was the elite that
was trying to force down on them a group of policies, a group of decisions, either they didn't agree with, or wasn't doing very much to help them or didn't address what they were concerned about. and donald trump from the very beginning had an instinct, then his campaign helped with it, but i think a lot of it was his own instinct about what was really troubling the american people. so i think that's the small r revolution that's going happen now. now you have to institutionalize that. now you have to -- when i won election as mayor, i won by 3%. the head of the republican party in new york, bill powers, came to see me the next day. he laid out for me, he said, next time, we don't want to have an ulcer while we're waiting for the election returns. we want to win by 10%. so here's how you're going to do it. this is how you're going to consolidate power. and we can take it through eight years instead of four.
think that's part of what president-elect trump has to do. he's got to take his agenda and we're ata three-part government. the other part's the congress, so you have to get it through the congress. it's no good to have all these ideas if you can't get them passed. mr. baker: what are those key elements? throughout the campaign, donald trump talked about the -- he channeled this populism. so he talked about -- he fought trade. he said free trade was not -- he opposed nafta. he said nafta needs to be renegotiated. he opposesed t.p.p. he talked about tariffings on goods coming in from other countries. he talked about that and about limiting immigration, aggressive moves on immigration. he talked about this -- he channeled this populism. this kind of nationalist populism. at the same time -- by the way, he said things in the final week of the campaign about imposing taxes on companies that lay off workers.
this is a populist message. at the same time, he seems to stand for a pretty, you know, conventional republican conservative position, deregulation, lower taxes, something that would actually -- that a lot of business people in this room a would favor. so -- but there's a tension here, isn't there, between this populism and this traditional conservative pro-business strategy, how is that going to resolve itself? mr. giuliani: first of all, the art here -- i hate to go too much back to jackson. but jackson's election led to the beginning of the democratic party. so he turned it -- he actually turned it into a really first vital political party. so now what he's got to do is accomplish most of his agenda and turn it into something where the republican party becomes the majority -- i think we already are the majority party in this country.
but the majority party at the presidential level. which we haven't been since -- really since reagan, we haven't been the majority party at the presidential level. i think it's going to mean a combination of both of those things. being practical. there are certain things he has to deliver on. because he promised them. sort of the way bush said, read my lips. he has to deliver on controlling -- mr. baker: which he famously didn't deliver on. mr. giuliani: that cost him the presidency. he has to deliver on securing the borders. three years from now we have to be a country that doesn't have wide-open borders, dangerous people, criminals, who are kept here committing crimes. he's got to show tremendous progress in that area. i think he has to lower taxes. he has to lower taxes on everybody.
so everybody gets a little bit more money in their pocket. so they can spend it. and he particularly has to lower the corporate tax. which i think could be one of the biggest things he can do to really, really ignite our economy. get it down from 35% to 15%. and then i think he has to work on repatriation of money by having a low bar of 10%. do you that and within two, three years, you're going see an economy that's growing at numbers where we can sustain a lot of the other things that we have to do. and i think on trade, part of it could be the rhetoric of a campaign. part of it can be the misinterpretation of the media. but i think you're not talking about a man that's against free trade. i think he's man who's against unfair deals. which i think he regards as the deal with mexico, nafta is unfair. mr. baker: you think that would address the concerns of the
people in ohio and pennsylvania, wisconsin? who feel really upset and angry about what they see as the loss of jobs because of trade deals in mexico and china. mr. giuliani: i think the things i've outlined, including readjusting nafta, so you don't have things like -- we build a car in mexico, in america, in michigan, let's say, and we send that car to mexico and they put an 18% tax on it. they build a car in mexico and they send it back to america and we put nothing on it. well, that's a one-way deal. so, how about we kind of even it out a little bit. i think that's what he's trying to do. he's trying to make these deals , fair deals, so that we can both make progress on either side of the border. i think if you combine that with his general tax cut, his corporate tax cut, his repatriation tax cut, and fairer free trade deals, i think you're going to see a large increase in jobs in those
places where he won. like michigan, like ohio, like wisconsin, what we call, unfortunately, the rustbelt. mr. baker: so that tension between the populism, you know, the anti-wall street, anti-corporate sentiment, some of which donald trump tapped into, and the traditional conservative pro-bisque, deregulation -- that probably couldn't be better reflected than in the announcement that we had yesterday, the two -- these two first appointments for the administration. the chief of staff and steve banen as the chief strategist -- bannon as the chief strategist. you know both of them extremely well. mr. giuliani: i know them really well. mr. baker: you know what different views they have. bannon is a aggressive populist flame flower. he thinks that globalism is destroying national identity and he thinks that what he would like to see done is an administration that takes on these sort of globalist,
corporatist, global capitalist entities. priebus is a much more traditional conservative republican. who's going to win that fight? r. giuliani: donald trump. i love that. that's exactly what i did when i became mayor of new york. i surrounded myself with people who disagreed with each other. i always thought it was a really bad idea to surround myself with people who completely agreed with each other, because i'd never hear the other side of the argument. donald trump is an extraordinarily smart man. he has a great understanding, particularly of the economy, and i think exposing him to different viewpoints is the very best thing we can do. it's exactly what obama didn't do, although he said he was going to do it, because he had read "team of rivals." he was going to put all his rivals in. all did he was put in a bunch of people who had never had a job before.
and got no advice from business. i know some of the people on his business council who used to complain to me, we only met once. we met one time. and they quit. so i think instead you're going to see a president who exposes priebus in the case of and steve, of course they have different view points. but i saw them work for three months on the campaign as complete teammates. sometimes different views. but willing to talk them out. and ultimately if they have a disagreement, you know who decides it. the president of the united states. i worked for ronald reagan and i used to be the third ranking official in the justice department. a lot of cabinet meetings in which there were very, very big ebates between the guys.
there was only one vote. it's like abraham lincoln. the cabinet members said, i thought it was majority rule. it is, the president has the majority. mr. baker: reminds me of margaret thatcher. talk about this, a little bit about steve bannon. there's been concern expressed today about some of the things that he's associated with. breitbart, of course, the organization he runs, has got a, let's say it, how do i put this, a reputation for some slightry robust -- slightly robust approach to news. has been accused of racism and anti-semitism. is that something, you were a mayor of new york city, you had to deal with issues of racial tension. mr. giuliani: i haven't seen any of that in steve in the time that i've dealt with him. i've seen a very, very smart,
very bright man, very worldly man. i also -- i also think something happens to you when the election's over. i think you've seen it happen to donald trump. happened to me when i became mayor. the day i woke up after being elected mayor, i realized, oh, my god, i got to do this now. there's a weight that falls on your shoulders. and you start to think in a somewhat different way. it's not that you change your position. but you begin to realize, i've got to bring in more people, i've got to listen to more opinions. i've got to broaden my horizons. i don't think that just happens to the president. i think that happens to the chief of staff. the policy advisor. the communications director. secretary of defense. attorney general. secretary of state. there's a difference -- when you're out there just criticizing, it's one thing. when you get on the inside, there's a certain way to -- weight of responsibility for the american people that is on
your shoulders and i think steve bannon is the kind of guy who gets that. he's a patriot. he loves america. he may have a different view of america than you do. but he loves america as much as you or i do. and i think he will give donald trump his best advice and ultimately it's the president who makes the decisions. mr. baker: that change you talk about, the realization that you're now the president, or the mayor, have you seen that in donald trump in the last week? mr. giuliani: everybody has. i think the withhold world has seen it. mr. baker: in what way has he changed? mr. giuliani: from the moment , went to see barack obama the way in which they dealt with each other. the way in which he's conducting himself. his attempt to try as best he can to bring america together. i think all these protests, i don't take them as seriously as some people do. i think they're going to go away. they're just going to happen for a while because some people
are disappointed and they're angry. a little bit is organized. little bit is sorrow funded and driven. but i think that's going to go away. i think what we're going to worldly and h more expansive president than we ever realized. -- realized we were electing. mr. baker: let me ask but a couple of specific corporate things, then i want to get on to the foreign issues. which of are -- which are of increasing interest to you. not that you haven't always been interested in them. they may have a particular relevance to you. one of the things that i've heard a lot and i spent some time with president-elect trump and with steve bannon and others, is that there is, again, this concern about big business. again, it's channeling this populist instinct about big business, big companies, and you have here, you know, this
is the mother load of big companies, mr. mayor. let me -- is there going to be an assumption that this is going to be an administration that's going to take on some of these big business issues? for example, there's a big merger announced, at&t, time warner. you could be attorney general. it could come up on your ledger as -- in the antitrust department. are these big mergers going to be opposed by the trump administration? mr. giuliani: first of all, i won't be attorney general. mr. baker: you won't be? mr. giuliani: i won't have to decide that one. thank god. so i can escape that one. mr. baker: i should ask jeff sessions that question, shouldn't i? mr. giuliani: wouldn't be a bad idea but i don't know who's going to be attorney general. [laughter] i was the third ranking official in the justice department under ronald reagan but i ran the criminal side of the justice kept. -- department. although i have litigated three r four antitrust cases for
at&t, way back when there was the big, big at&t. so i think you'll see a pretty uch conservative approach to antitrust law. if the predatory pricing, if it's predatory pricing where there are alternatives, you'll probably see a challenge to it. if it's a situation in which there's no alternative but a large conglomerate, i think you'll see the justice department passing on that. i think what you'll see is pretty much the traditional republican approach to the antitrust division, like we had under reagan and bush. i don't think you're going to see -- mr. baker: that's pretty accommodating. mr. giuliani: the last thing in the world you're going to see is an anti-business administration. donald trump realizes that he got elected to a very large extent on something he said in
so many speeches, jobs, jobs, jocks. i understood this as mayor of new york. the only way i have jobs is by getting businesses. if i throw businesses out of my country, i'm not going to have jobs. so, being pro-business is being pro-jobs. i think one of the big changes that's going to happen immediately is, instead of having in washington an administration that is anti-business, which the obama administration was aggressively anti-business, you're going to have one that is aggressively pro-business. that doesn't mean there won't be a necessary level of regulation. but i'll tell you one thing that president-elect trump told me as we traveled. he said, you know, one of the things i learned running for president, when i began, i thought the biggest concern that businesses had was taxes. he said, it's true they are concerned about taxes.
particularly our highest tax rate in the world, 35%. ireland being only 12%. he said, what i learned is what they tell me is their biggest concern is regulation. i'm going to cut those damn regulations in half. i bet you anything you want that within three months you're going to see those -- that regulatory burden -- psh. being a lawyer in private practice, that is not good for law firms. because we love all those regulations. because we made a lot of money on them. but the reality is, that was killing jobs production in america more than anything else. e.p.a. pretending it was congress. other agencies of government legislating rules and dodd-frank. dodd-frank, excuse me, but we're now allowed to talk in politically incorrect terms, right?
that's part of the revolution. we can now talk politically incorrectly. dodd-frank doesn't have a damn thing to do with the 2007 whatever you want to call it. recession, crash, whatever. it has to do with a bunch of liberal ideas that two of the guys that created the darn problem in the first place, dodd and frank, i mean, frank was the guy that was protecting fannie mae and freddie mac when clinton wanted to reform it. frank stopped bush from reforming it. and dodd got a sweetheart loan from them. i think it's the biggest irony in american history that we named the legislation to solve our 2007 crash over the two people who probably had the most to do with it. and everything in it is largely irrelevant to why that took place in the first place. mr. baker: we have elizabeth warren coming to speak to us tomorrow. mr. giuliani: you go ask her that. [laughter]
we'd be very happy to run against her in four years. mr. baker: quick couple of questions. that's an interesting tip there, by the way. quick couple of questions before i get on some of these foreign policy issues. during the campaign, president-elect trump said that he would appoint a special prosecutor to investigate and possibly prosecute hillary clinton over the emails and clinton foundation stuff. is he going to? mr. giuliani: i think that's a decision -- i've always told him this, i think that's a decision he should make when he appoints an attorney general. the attorney general should sit down and study it and give him a very reasoned, balance of two things. one, and they're both important. i don't want to minimize either one. one is the idea that we don't want to become a country where we have political vindictiveness after an election. number two, we also don't want to be a country of unequal protection of the law. a lot of that has to do with what i don't know. which is, how bad are the
things involved in the clinton foundation investigation? ow beyond the pale are they? that's going to fall to a large extent on the attorney general. if the attorney general decides that they're not that far beyond the pale, maybe we just put it behind us. the attorney general decides that they have to be investigated, then it shouldn't be donald trump's attorney general. it should be an independent counsel who investigates it. but i think that has to be a very detailed, reasoned study of the f.b.i. investigation that i believe is in the new york office of the f.b.i. mr. baker: foreign policy. for those of you not familiar with it, the "wall street journal" reported earlier this afternoon that the choice for secretary of state in a trump administration is down to rudolph giuliani and john bolton. we don't have john bolton here tonight. so i'm going to ask you questions. mr. giuliani: john would be a very good choice.
mr. baker: is there anybody better? mr. giuliani: maybe me. i don't know. [laughter] mr. baker: so let me try and channel what soom of those confirmation hearings will be like. let's start with iran. president-elect trump said the iran deal that president obama struck was a disaster, a disaster -- i think he described it as the worst deal possibly he'd ever seen in his life. certainly the the worst deal ever constructed on a government to government basis. what should the u.s. -- he's going to be president on january 20. this deal is still in place. iran still continues to do what it's doing. how are you -- what would you do about that? mr. giuliani: first of all, president has a lot of options. because president obama didn't do what he should have done really under the constitution. he should have submitted that to the united states senate. that's a treaty. there's no way of escaping the fact that that's a treaty. if you'd like to go to sleep
early tonight, get the federalist papers and read federalist papers 75. written by hamilton. who's now a broadway star as well as a great -- and if you want the quintessential definition of a treaty, it's the iran agreement. it binalds us for more than one president, it binalds us for a number of years. it involves a significant area of national security, nuclear power. should have been submitted to congress, to the senate, for a 2/3 vote of the senate as president. he never did it. what that means is, that deal is over with, with the present president. the next president can disavow it as a matter of law, like that. mr. baker: should he? mr. giuliani: well, either he should or he should use that power to renegotiate it, letting them know -- i don't have to live by any of this. none of this is binding on me. because he never got the votes.
he actually -- obama had even a second waco have done it. could he have done it as an agreement. in which case he only would have to have got an majority vote of the house and senate. he knew he couldn't get it. but it was a deal that was negotiated not only with the iranians but with the russians and chinese. mr. baker: do you fancy spending the first two years as secretary of state renegotiating -- mr. giuliani: no. i think you have to set priorities. so if the priority is, let's eliminate isis, maybe you put that off a little bit and you get rid of isis first. and then you go back to that. because isis short term, i believe, is our greatest danger. iraq t because of isis in and in syria. but because isis did something al qaeda never did. isis was able to spread itself
around the world. so, there are 32 countries that have isis cells. the director of the f.b.i. says there are 1,000 investigations in the u.s. so they've created a danger that al qaeda never presented to us in terms of their ability to strike smaller strikes but still very devastating, like orlando and paris and san bernardino and the priest whose head was chopped off in nice, which is one that i can't even think about. mr. baker: to be on the run in the region, right? mosul sunday -- mr. giuliani: i think if you eliminate them where they are, they lose a lot of power in their ability -- one of the values, and there were a lot of disadvantages, but one of the values to our having a lot of troops in iraq and afghanistan was we kept them on the run.
so if you notice, from september 11 until the attack at fort hood, there was no islamic extremist domestic attack in the united states. one of the reasons for that was it's hard to plan an attack when you're being shot at and you're in a cave. computers don't work really well in a cave. al qaeda wasn't particularly good at using computers. this new group, isis, is different. a lot of them are recruited from us. they come from england. they come from germany. they come from france. they come from america. they understand us. they understand how to use the internet as well as our children do. in that sense, we have got -- that's got to be priority number one. we have to eliminate that threat. because we don't want to live with the threat, as we have under obama, of what's the next city they're going to hit? are they going to hit st. louis, are they going to hit chicago? are they going to go back to
paris? i think once you get that under control, you can start working on the second, which may be a long-term problem, which is a great fear of mine, which is an iranian shi'ite kingdom. because now, to be honest, you would have to say that iraq is a client state of iran. and we delivered it to them. could be the worst mistake in american -- no -- yeah, robably the worst mistake -- mr. baker: most say inavoid vading iraq would be the worst -- invading iraq was the worst decision made in american history. mr. giuliani:, no i say the way we exited iraq. which meant we turned them over to iran. in turning them over to iran, we turned syria over to iran. and then we weren't there when isis began to develop. so what you have -- if you're
not careful, what you have developing is, i call it almost a north-south middle east. you have iran, iraq, syria, ith the backing of russia, yemen right below saudi arabia. so it isn't quite north-south. there's a little bit in the south there. then you have saudi arabia, the mirates, qatar, oman, egypt, israel, jordan, sunni, the south. that's a war that's going to happen if we don't figure out how to contain iran and stop them interest being nuclear. mr. baker: russia, as you just mentioned, is playing an important role. been a lot of focus on russia. president-elect trump's views on russia. just simply in your view, is russia a friend or adversary? mr. giuliani: both. it's both. or could be both.
right now it's adversary. because we made it that way. it could be both. .ust like china what i'd like to see with china is to be an economic competitor. as opposed to a military competitor. russia thinks it's a military competitor. it really isn't. if you compare the size of our military and theirs, it's ourn willingness under obama to even threaten the use of our military that mix russia so powerful. mr. baker: -- makes russia so powerful? mr. baker: what that change what's happening in crimea? mr. giuliani: i believe that it could contain them. we do what donald trump talked about in his military agenda. which is, we take our military
up to 550,000 troops, we were going down to 40,000. we take our navy up -- 420,000. we take our navy up to 350 ships. we were going down to 247. that's really critical. at 247, we can't fight a two-ocean war. we gave up the pacific. at 350, china can't match us in the pasifpblgt it becomes very different. he's going to take our marines from about 28 battalions to 36. and he's going take our air force from about 900 fighters that need parts that we have to get from museums. mr. baker: what are they all going to do me? seems to be very much against, you know, he was against the iraq war. he says he's against the u.s. -- very critical of what the u.s. did in libya. what are you going to do with additional armed forces? mr. giuliani: he used the
phrase he borrowed from ronald reagan. ronald reagan probably borrowed from george washington. which is called peace through strength. if you face them with a litary that is modern, gigantic, overwhelming, and unbelievably good at conventional warfare, they may challenge you. but i doubt it. gorbachev gave donald trump the answer to how to win. gorbachev wrote in one of his memoirs, i think the principle one that he wrote, ronald reagan spent us into oblivion. and i am a big advocate of military spending. mr. baker: you think could you do the same with china? mr. giuliani: i will tell what you happened with china. i believe this completely. i spent a little time in china. i believe you have in china, a lot of people here know china, i think you have in china a tension, not unlike what we have, between -- let's call
them the hawks and the doves. the hawks are military power can really help us grow economically. the doves say, hey, we're so powerful, we're so big, we have so many poor people we have to bring out of poverty, 700 million, that -- let's become an economic competitor, not a military competitor. so, if our navy is that much bigger than theirs, the doves win that war. because the hawks can't get the money they need to come and catch us. but if obama takes our navy down here and you can kind of catch us, you kind of encourage them. if we take our navy up here, they're not going to be able to catch us. and here's what i believe and know about the chinese. whatever else you think, they're enormously practical people.
and they also realize they have two things to overcome that stand in the way of being a great world power. one is the enormous amount of poverty that they have. they are a first world country and a third world country combined. half, one half the other. mr. baker: second largest economy in the world. mr. giuliani: someday, if it isn't already, it's going to be a big problem for them. second, they've developed such a large middle class, you cannot sustain the oppression, you can't sustain the authoritarianism that they presently have. that's going to crack. at some point. the chinese are great on all kinds of plans except innovative ones. they haven't thought their way through that yet. mr. baker: we have time for -- i really want the participants here, a couple of questions, please, if we could -- please put your hand up if you have a question. yes, someone over there. i think we have a microphone
right next to you in fact. could you identify yourself. it's a little dark. questioner: i hope you recall that my family, for actually nine decades, this month, has have been helping to finance our cities an states through municipal bonds. so, as the c.e.o. of my company for 15 years, and i have dozens of employees in new york, in atlanta, in chicago, and i have always taken care of them. they are my family. so many of them have expressed to me over the last week how scared they are. there's a point at which as a c.e.o. i can't take care of them anymore. i can't tell them everything's going to be ok. so my question to you, and say it with great respect, is when will president-elect trump come out and announce the very scary things that have already happened, that have affected some of my african-american employees? i need to go back to them tomorrow and tell them that everything's going to be ok.
mr. giuliani: what are they afraid of? questioner: they're afraid of having swastikas painted on walls. i have african-american employees who are truly afraid to be african-american. they're all scared. they've seen what's gone on in the last week and they're terrified. i'm terrified for them. because i can't take care of them. i can't tell them it's going to be ok. it's coming -- this comes from being a c.e.o. mr. giuliani: ok. tel you can tell them they're going to be ok. i'll tell you why they're going to be ok. they're going to be ok because, number one, they have a president of the united states that not only doesn't have a prejudiced bone in his body, and he doesn't, i have known him for 28 years, but who has a real commitment to trying to help the african-american community. he didn't begin saying for four straight months in every single speech that he gave that he is very concerned about the condition of the
african-american community in our inner cities. and that he believes that they should take a look at another alternative to their success than what democrats have done for them. every city you can mention, exempt maybe mine, that has the intervention of a republican and a somewhat republican mayor for a while, that's michael bloomberg, those cities have completely deteriorated under democrats. the democratic policy to the african-american community is, make them dependent, make them dependent on welfare and food stamps. and don't do a damn thing for them. so what donald trump said, let me give you the ladder to success. and here's the ladder to success in america. number one, a safe community. you can't live in a community like a lot of chicago where --
questioner: can you answer my question? mr. giuliani: i'm trying to answer your question. questioner: no, you're not. mr. giuliani: tell me how. questioner: when is he going to denounce what's already happened? when is he going to do that? when? skwlipe has happened? -- mr. giuliani: what has happened? to be fair, do you mean -- questioner: do you see what's happened in this country? mr. giuliani: he went on "60 minutes" last night. mr. baker: he said, stop it. stop it. r. giuliani: of course he did. he mr. baker: he told people to stop. mr. giuliani: he told people to stop doing what they're doing. he has no more control over them than president obama or hillary clinton have over the goons and thugs that are in my city that are destroying property, that are taking over streets. and that are yelling and screaming at donald trump. so, go ask president obama, when is he going to tell them to stop it and when is that
going to be effective? he has no more control over it than the goons and thugs in los angeles who are destroying property because donald trump was elected. so let's be fair about things. if there are crazy people who have come to crazy conclusions about donald trump's election, all i can do is tell them to stop it. at least he's done that. i haven't heard barack obama say, cut it out, stop demonstrating, stop taking over fifth avenue on the streets, it doesn't belong to you. when i was mayor of new york nobody, nobody took my streets. you've got to take my sidewalks. you could demonstrate all you wanted on my sidewalks. but my mayor now allows people to block fifth avenue. that is dangerous. if you block fifth avenue, people die. you can't get them to the hospital on time.
to get them safe from heart attacks. you can't get to a fire on time. so if you want to say donald trump should stop the crazy people from doing the stupid things that they're doing, then you got say to barack obama and hillary clinton, you stop the much larger group of people who are doing crazy things in los angeles, in chicago, and in new york, that are doing serious damage. mr. baker: let's move to another question. please tell me by the way that the president is going to live in washington, isn't going to -- presently live in new york. is fifth eavek going to be the traffic nightmare for the next four years. mr. giuliani: the president is going to live in washington. and new york hopefully will have a new mayor next year. [laughter] who lerns how to keep it a civil city. mr. baker: here at this table here. questioner: i'm from snap-on tools.
first of all, congratulations on winning over the factory workers inal again toa and the people in -- algona and the people in shops in peoria. we like to see the experts unfounded sometimes. i think this is a reasonable question, it has to do with where he's going to live. if you watched donald trump during the campaign, at least from a distance, it looked like he was very hands-on. shaping the message himself. working on it on a regular basis. and in fact defining what his message would be. when you become president, you know, it's generally been said that you have a constant barrage of questions that annot be decided on the facts. do you believe he's going to handle that the same way did he his campaign? in other words, immerse himself in it or delegate? that's one question. can he actually immerse himself as other presidents have?
and then secondly, when he confronts those questions that can't be decided on the facts, that you just can't look at the arithmetic associated with it, what will be his guiding stars? will it be jobs or -- mr. giuliani: very good question. first of all, he probably discounts somewhat, because you don't know him and maybe a bit of this is his style, just how reflective and how much he can delve into issues and things. the things he talked about are things he thought a lot about. they're not just things that he spent a great deal of time thinking about the policies that he thought were necessary for the american people. that's the reason he won. not to relitigate the election. but hillary clinton gave very little attention to the policies she would put into effect when she was president. he gave a great deal of attention to the policies he would put into effect when he
became president. he talked about immigration. he talked about taxes. he talked about trade. he talked about foreign relations. the iranian agreement. she didn't talk about any of that. i think you're giving him a little less credit for the amount of thought that went into what he was saying and what he was doing. i've seen him in many meetings with four or five, six, seven, eight people where they were talking about foreign policy, military policy or domestic policy, absorb what people were saying. i told but his change of opinion on what was more important to american business, taxes or regulation. and he came to the conclusion that regulation was more important. so i think you're going to find an extraordinarily intelligent an, who enjoys public policy as issues, he's even admitted to me about halfway through the
campaign, he enjoys it even more than real estate because it's a lot more challenging. and then i think you're going to see him surround himself with highly intelligent people. because he's not afraid of highly intelligent people. i think you're going to see him surround himself with people of much higher intellect and of much higher success than we've had the last eight years. questioner: [inaudible] mr. baker: we're really running out of time. mr. giuliani: people who challenge him and are willing to challenge him, because he's not afraid to be challenged. mr. baker: one more question. there's a lady over there with her hand up. we have time for one more. i'm sorry. we could go on much longer. questioner: hi. it's nice to see you. so, i think you mentioned something a couple minutes ago that would raise the spirits of a lot of people in this room. you talked about tariffs and when you spoke about it, you talk about other countries
lowering their tariffs rather than the united states increasing theirs in response. to some sort of trade war scenario. could you talk a little bit more about that framework and would it indeed be something that would lead to a global lowering of trade tariffs? mr. giuliani: you want me to talk about trade? ok. so i think what you're going to -- probably -- gosh. probably than any president we've had in a long time, we have a president who has spent his time traveling the world an doing business all over the world. right? our last president traveled out of the united states maybe three times, four times. mr. baker: he lived in indonesia. as a child. mr. giuliani: was he in europe? not much , right? george bush, not much. ok. so we have somebody who's done business all over the world.
he understands the world. he's got a terrific understanding of the fact that we are a global economy. that doesn't mean that we're not also our own economy. that we have to protect first. and our own economy, we have to make consistent with the global economy. so that we can get our fair share of the advantages of the global economy. so, as he has said many times, but it's never been reported properly, he's not a protectionist. he's a free trader. but a fair trader. mr. baker: he's talked about imposing 45% tariffs on good from china. mr. giuliani: let me leave you with the following thought. if donald trump were going to sell the hotel that he just built here in washington, right, which may be the best hotel in washington. mr. baker: you're staying there. mr. giuliani: i don't know how much it's worth. give me a price. he would ask for double the price.
to start with. then he'd probably take less than that. you're dealing with a negotiator. i work for ronald reagan. ronald reagan passed one of the largest tax cuts in american history. the one he presented to tip o'neill was twice the size of the one that he got. we're feeling can -- dealing with a man who knows how to negotiate. it's like when he said he want everybody to pay their fair share in nato. they interpreted that as, we're going to pull out of nato. we're not going pull out of nato. but believe me, he'll get them to pay their fair share of it. maybe he'll do it by -- we'll put a few more troops in, and in exchange for that, if we put more troops in, you got to get up to your 2%. we can't subsidize you any longer because we got a big debt. so i think what you're going to find is somebody negotiating
for us for once. i'll give you an example of the difference. when barack obama and hillary clinton came into office, they gave away the nuclear defense of poland and the cejka republic. to reset the relationship with russia. and i was on a panel much like this about six months ago which secretary gates, who was the defense secretary, and i said to him something that's always troubled me. i said to him, what did we get in return for that? and he said the spanish word, nada. he was opposed to it. now, that is a stupid negotiation. i don't know if we ever should have given away the nuclear defense of those countries to start with. if we were going to do it, we had to get something in return for it. so donald trump will probably go to congress, and he'll go to the world, with an agenda that's a little bit beyond what
he needs so he has room to negotiate. just like every one of you do in business. you don't put your house up for sale if it's a $2 million house and you want $2 million for it, at $2 million. you put it up at $2.5 million. or $2.6 million. and then you ebleds up at $2 million. if you understand business, if you understand how to negotiate, if you understand how to do foreign relations, if you have no experience in doing that, you do silly things like give away the nuclear defense of poland and the chzech republic for nothing and then putin concludes from day one, i can push you all over the world. because you're not too smart. and i think when you listen to what donald trump said during the election, and when you listen to some of the things he proposes, please, as intelligent leaders of business, understand he's doing
the same thing you're doing in a deal that you want to make. you don't start at your lowest number. if you do, you're not going to be running your business very long. you start somewhere higher with a plan b and a plan c and a plan d. and that's the complexity with which he thinks. that makes a great president. i work for one. i only worked for one president in my whole life. ronald reagan. ronald reagan was always underestimated. he always had a plan a, a plan b, a plan c, and if worse got to worst, he even had a plan d. but he never got really what he wanted. mr. baker: mayor giuliani, sounds like you are going to have a very busy new year. mr. giuliani: thank you. mr. baker: please join me in thanking mayor giuliani.
thank you very much indeed. that was fascinating. we're going to be hearing more about these topics over the next few years, next few weeks certainly. moving right along. we're a little bit delayed. this is a fascinating conversation. we have another equally fascinating conversation to come right now. every president, successful presidential campaign has an architect. famously president obama had david axelrod. president george w. bush, of course, had carl roving, the architect, as even -- karl rove, the architect as he's known, most people in the political business believe our next guest was very much the architect of the recent presidential election success of donald trump. so, we are looking forward to a very interesting conversation about that and about the next four years. ladies and gentlemen, please welcome kellyanne conway, now special advisor to the transition team, and my colleague, jerry, from the "wall street journal."
ms. conway: thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. we almost didn't make it because there was a transition meeting going on backstage. sorry, mayor, we had to break it up. thank you for being here. ms. conway: thank you. >> this is proof that if you hang around long enough, amazing things happen. kelly andrew: and i first knew each other -- kellyanne and i first knew each other years ago. here we are. who knew? life rolls on in interesting ways. you went through an experience, iment is you hadn't planned on n the last six months. we all lived through a night tuesday night we all thought was different than expected. ms. conway: not all of us. [laughter] mr. seib: i'll take your word for that. let me start -- i want to look more forward than backward. let me start with what did
happen on tuesday night and ask you, what was the message, what was the mandate, what was the voice of voters as you read it, now that the dust has settled, from last tuesday night? ms. conway: first of all, thank you for having me. mr. murdoch and mr. thompson, mr. baker. all of you at the c.e.o. council in the "wall street journal." i really appreciate the opportunity. so the message on tuesday night is that there's more of them than us. i think the cues and clues the election in 2016 were hiding in plain sight. everything that donald trump said about the populist uprising, people really just wanting fairness and an opportunity and a voice, ended up being true. and we can talk about it being an anti-elitist election. i think that's fine and that has some merit. but it's very core, people were talking about security. it could be security from
terrorism, national security, but it's also health care security, economic security, it's capital s social security, but also small s social security. donald trump went to states like pennsylvania and new hampshire talking about opioid use and in ohio, talking about opioid use. that's a different kind of insecurity that was fairly new to our communities. i think people are also talking about everyday affordability. i've been a vocal and long time critic of republican politicians who run around talking about job creation, you didn't build that, and i'm a job creator, i'm an entrepreneur, i think that's wonderful. i've been a job creator for 21 years. i think that's fabulous. however, that's about 7% of the country, are job creators. or fancy themselves as entrepreneurs. there's another 7% that are the job seekers, the unemployed or so, 7% or so. but the vast majority of households are neither job creators nor job seekers. they are job holders. and donald trump gave voice to
the job holders. the people in this country who say, gosh, when my grandfather had a job, or your grandfather had a job, it was enough to support the whole family. we have two, three jobs in the households and we're white-knuckled at the end of each month, trying to figure out how to pay the rent or the mortgage or the tuition or the school voucher, the student loan payment, the food and the fuel. and i think he gave voice to those folks who are just trying to meet everyday needs and have a fair shake. people were also talking about fairness. i think that hillary clinton's campaign was about equality and a lot of this country, of course, we cherish queament. it's enshrined in our constitution and our other laws. but most people are talking about fairness, which is different. fairness is about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcomes. when you listen to people closely, what really undergirded their views towards
education reform, like school choice or opening up more technical and vocational opportunities for maybe kids who just aren't college material, and that's fine, actually that's good, then the talk about immigration policy, talking about tax reform, when they're talking about letting syrian refugees in by 550%, as hillary would, or not, they're really talking about what is fair. and i think donald trump put issues on the map that no one was giving voice to. like trade, and like illegal immigration. illegal immigration, he articulated it through an economic lens. so that we were no longer only asking what is fair to the illegal immigrant, all of a sudden we were asking, what's fair to the american worker, what's fair to ask employers to do? is it enough to just enroll in e-verify and wash your hands clean, or should we be asking them to do more?
what's fair to local communities? what's fair to folks who just -- they would do the jobs that others are doing, about but they can't do it for $6 under the table, nor should they be asked to. so i think he gave voice to issues that were more part of the social and cultural than just the garden variety political set of ideas. the other thing is, i read with rapt attention, but no surprise, that hillary clinton had tested up to 84 slogans years in advance of the presidential race. that's remarkable. and i certainly hope her pollsters got paid by the slogan. donald trump basically started and ended with make america great again. and some people criticized that. but his very essence, it was about patriotism and it was about aspiration and opportunity and freedom and, frankly, fairness. the other thing i would take
from all of this is what's the message? a couple messages. one is, that ethics and veracity are a qualification for president of the united states, i think that folks in hillary clinton's campaign, which is filled with brilliant, savvy strategists, including her, the candidate herself, but he idea that idea of temperment is affirmative cry terion and trust wortsiness and veer as it. mr. baker: he tapped into an anger that was out in the country and it produced somewhat divisive campaign. host: one of the things i wanted to ask you, what can be done now to heal those divisions? w