tv Washington Journal Rep. Scott Taylor CSPAN December 13, 2017 4:21pm-4:48pm EST
the vote is to roll back net neutrality rules. live thursday at 10:30 a.m. eastern on c-span3. c-span.org. or listen to it live with the free c-span radio app. now, representative scott taylor, member of the appropriations committee, serving areas in the second district in virginia. good morning. rep. taylor: good morning. host: budgets must be passed. what are the possibilities of
resolving all the issues before the end of the year? rep. taylor: let me preface by saying for the first time in over a decade house representatives have passed all 12 of preparations bills, which is important because it gives -- gets us closer to regular order. obviously it was a bad way to run the government from multiyear projects, to military installations and programs, so i am proud of the house having passed all 12 of the appropriations bills. however, it had to go to a continued resolution because the senate was not ready to go. now here we are again, they are still not ready, and we are in a short-term continued resolution, we will negotiate very soon and i am not optimistic we will be able to come to a deal on all bills, but there is a huge movement in the house and it will be pressure in the senate to at the very minimum take of the military appropriations,
pass in those and move forward with a shorter continuing resolution to be able to hash out the deal on the rest of the bills. host: why is it important for the military to be separate? rep. taylor: we are operating in combat missions in many countries, another topic we can talk about anytime, so we have those troops fighting right now. and sequestration, you have probably heard about numerous times on those arbitrary cuts that have really harmed military readiness. it has increased deployment schedules, hurting our families. training has suffered, a lot of aircraft need maintenance and ships as well. it must be funded. our troops are in harms way. there is a pay raise for them. it is the right thing to do and we need to get it done. host: as far as the ability to go on and get other things done by, december are you confident it will happen? rep. taylor: for the military piece? host: overall. rep. taylor: i think you will see the tax bill, which we voted
on first, we are in a short-term cr now and i think the tax bill will be voted on and we will have another short-term cr at the beginning of the year. the house is ready to go. we already past the appropriations bills, we have about 350 bills that are sitting in the senate waiting for action, so we are needing them to get up and get working. host: please call (202) 748-8001 if you want to speak with our guest, republicans. (202) 748-8000 and (202) 748-8002, and you can post comments and questions on our twitter feed. on the tax side of it, where do you stand? rep. taylor: even in my campaign and now there are three fundamental things i wanted to see, number one of course was reprinted ration of money from overseas, that could be in our economy flowing in the market,
benefiting us. the second thing was the corporate rates, corporations for more competitiveness as well as for the small businesses. and probably most importantly, we have working families and working folks. i do not like the word middle-class because it is subjective, where you live, whether you feel like you are in the middle class or not, but working folks are paying more money, more taxes, then in the history of the nation. there are many that feel like the top has taken advantage, and the able-bodied folks are taking advantage, and it has been on the shoulders of working folks, so we had to see tax relief for them. i believe are bill addresses those issues for me. and i think there are some things i like better in the senate and vice versa, but obviously they are in conference now and we will sue with the end product is for me to say yes or no, but right now i think i will be looking at a yay. host: one criticism was the
impact on debt and deficit. despite that, you would support the bill? rep. taylor: i think the increased economic activity will have papers for sure. you have seen a lot of political attacks from the left about the debt and deficit, meanwhile in the past decade you are talking about a trillion dollars added to it and nobody talked about it -- 8 trillion dollars and nobody talked about it. i believe in the american people in a believe if you move some of these things out of the way, that they will be very productive and there will be more revenue for the government. i would like to invest in the american people. host: there have been talks about digesting the corporate tax rate to 21% or higher, would you like to see it there are at the original 20%? rep. taylor: i was raised by a single mother and i know more money in her pocket would've been the difference of keeping the lights on or not, so in my opinion if we need to add just
the corporate rate to ensure everybody, or the working class if you will, to ensure that they get a break across the board, then i would before it. host: our first call is from jeff. he is in twin lakes, wisconsin. independent line, you are on with representative scott taylor. the bill has nothing to do with medicare or social security, but -- kicks in. if it does not work, why not have the tax cuts for the corporations mandatory, if they invest in their workers and stuff? they are saying we will do that. that is not good. theye deficit goes up, have to cut social security and medicare. you talked about this. you say it is not in the bill. no it is not, but if the deficit goes of that is what happens. rep. taylor: jeff, thank you for your call. i know that we certainly
appreciate it. i think, i will say when you look at entitlements, that is a dirty word for a lot of folks, but i will to you my generation has known two things, war and recession. we also understand that the entitlement programs like social security are on a path of unsustainability. we want them to be there when we are there, so we have to make tough choices and look at those things. when you look at those things, we know that we are living longer, it will be more expensive, my generation has more time and i believe my generation, because previous attempts to rein in the cost of those programs, such as security is something that you paid into of course, i have been paying since i was 11 years old working on the farm, but the reality is for us, want to start talking about that everybody says he will send grandma off the cliff and they become spiteful. we need to have leadership and it starts in my generation to
say that we are living older and we might have to change the age, put a lockbox for the money that we pay in, so the congress cannot read it like they have -- raid it, like they have previously. i appreciate your call. i did not come here to make easy decisions, i came to make tough ones and the right ones and it is important to look at those programs moving forward. host: on our democrat like my james, hello -- our democrat line, james, hello. go ahead. want tofirst, one -- i mention, people are ragging on alabama. first of all, alabama had 40% of people voting, so the state has not changed. red.- you say it is host: we will have to leave it there.
we were asking about the alabama senate race -- but what the think about the results from yesterday -- what do you think about the results from yesterday? he said, people voted. rep. taylor: my thoughts on it? james, sorry i could not year you. when you look at the alabama race, they spoke and there are many ways to look at it and many contributing factors to what happened, but the reality is republicans, and i know that there were 22,000 right in votes, and i think he lost by a similar number, so clearly republicans wrote folks in, or they voted against him. that was their decision and they spoke yesterday. and i think, i have been on the record that i thought mr. moore was a flawed candidate and some things are more important than politics and i think the folks in alabama showed that. host: to the point that president trump endorsed him,
what do you think about that? rep. taylor: i think politicians, i think politicians overestimate what endorsements mean. politics is local and it is who you are, you are the product. you can go get endorsements from people and a sometimes it helps, but you are the product, whoever the candidate is, you are ultimately responsible. i do not read into it to say that this percent endorsed them so it is because of them or vice versa. because they won or lost. you are the product when you are the candidate and i think that alabama and, i think those folks from alabama and largely everything we have seen in polls shows that people make their own decisions. they appreciate when folks support them for endorsements, but they make their own decisions and people do not want to be told how to vote. alabama spoke last night. host: no long-lasting impact on the party overall? rep. taylor: i think in the same
respect i believe a lot of times endorsements, people overestimate, or candidate overestimate the impact of endorsements, i also think that there is limited, in my opinion, with the outcome of alabama, i think for example i imagine the democrats are emboldened to take -- to -- that they would be mistaken that in wisconsin or other place it will be the same thing. because again, then you have underestimated the individual who is a candidate. in the end, that is the product. it is that. there are bigger trends, no question about that, but candidates on the left or the right can do things to insulate themselves in their own respective districts. there is motion, motivation right now, but i think democrats for example would be overestimating the impact of the alabama election across the nation. host: on the line for democrats.
in california, this is rudy. caller: hello, how are you? i would like to find out if republicans are going to job ntee job creation and wages going up. i will get your response online. host: a guarantee for job creation or an effort create jobs by republicans. rep. taylor: sure. rudy, thank you for your call. yeah, that is the whole goal, to create job creation. under this president, whatever your thoughts might be, there is no question that unemployment is down and the economy is up. consumer confidence is much higher under this president. republicans absolutely are working toward a job creation, making corporations and pass-through entities, small businesses, more competitive out there to create jobs. i do believe that it will create
jobs. host: craig, from new jersey on the independent line. caller: yes, mr. taylor, hi. rep. taylor: hi, greg. caller: he really did not answer the previous question, so my question is can you name me three large companies that pay 35% tax? rep. taylor: what question did i not answer, because i want to make sure that i answer all questions. caller: i believe the gentleman asked if you can guarantee that jobs would come back. rep. taylor: that jobs would come back? i think he asked can i guarantee that we are working toward job creation. absolutely, i know businesses in my own district that will invest to create jobs based upon the tax reduction. the second quest and was, i am sorry, what was the second question? host: i lost him.
rep. taylor: i apologize. i want to answer all questions. host: brian on the independent line. caller: hello. how are you? rep. taylor: good. how are you? caller: i am well. many are facing poverty in the appalachian region. virginians are actually committing suicide at twice the rate of other parts of the state. industryhe coal has completely moved into areas are not conducive to be creating business, i do think that the tax bill -- will lift those in appalachia out of poverty. it is my belief, because these areas are conducive to creating a consumer market for marijuana that can be exported to other parts of the state, and because it has to be formed by hand it seems this could be a way to lift these areas of virginia and appalachia out of poverty. rep. taylor: thank you for your
call and your question and i think that you make good points. what i will tell you is, before i get into the marijuana policy, that when i was in the state house we voted to legalize industrial hemp, which would also grow well in the southwest as tobacco did. on the record, i have cosponsored a bill that talk about decriminalization of marijuana, to push it back to the states. so that at the federal level course, because now you just have these writers that prohibit funds from being able to force against marijuana were the states have legalized it for medicinal purposes, or even a recreational purposes. i think we should leave it up to the states. virginia itself is a study in that this year. i was on the substance abuse council as a state delegate and we discussed this a lot, but i agree with you that the land in the southwest is conducive to be
of a to grow that for medicinal purposes or for whatever it is, research purposes and recreational use for some areas, if virginia decides to legalize it. i believe it is a state decision, not a federal decision. if virginia goes that way there is a possibility to create jobs in the southwest. host: jacqui in philadelphia, democrats line. caller: yes, i am very concerned about losing the medical deduction. i pay well over the 10% and it is very difficult for me. and i have friends who are in care facilities and it is going to be devastating for them. what is your opinion about that? rep. taylor: thank you for your call. i appreciate it. the senate side for the medical deduction piece, but i also have to say that when you look at deductions, or
whatever it might be, the teacher deduction was one that was talked about a lot and at face value it sounds bad, but the reality is it was about $30 or something like that. when you look at the totality in what you will be saving with taxes, you have to look at the whole piece. i do believe we should keep some of the abilities to deduct medical expenses and i believe a tax bill is going to skew toward the senate side anyway, because you need to get some much for the house. host: and our guest serves on the operations committee, he also serves within the homeland security committee, representative scott taylor joining us. we were asking all former guest about the funds used to pay for the sexual harassment settlements. what do you think about the fund overall and will there be transparency when paid out for those settlements, and what do
you want to see done with that? rep. taylor: i think that we can mount very shortly after -- we came out very shortly after that, taxpayers should not be subsidizing people's predatory behavior. should there be concurrency --should there be trans-printing? yes. should they be paid out, absolutely not. you have to do that in a responsible way and it is important to say this too, because there is a settlement fund that deals with, if you and i get into a car accident and you are a government employee, so there is a settlement fund for those purposes. if there is a car accident, for example, they will settle for $5,000 as opposed to litigating for $100,000, so you want to do that to save taxpayer money, but in terms of sexual harassment i do not think we should be paying out taxpayer dollars to settle sexual harassment cases. i also think every thing should be transparent.
everything. host: the house voted to enact training within the halls of congress, so what changes are you making? rep. taylor: we are doing the training. it is important. you have young staffers in congress, you know, some of the things are self-explanatory and some are very common sense, but with that said offices should have training to make sure that there are no problems. i know that house administration is looking at other things to be able to mitigate and not have these problems. host: what does the training look like? what is required? rep. taylor: right now, there is one line training, but they're looking at increasing it for us and i am not sure what it will look like. they are working on it now. host: we have our guest from florida, republican line. caller: praise be for c-span that allows, citizens to have a
voice in national television. i want to ask our congressman if , areill join in with the you still on? in my still on? -- am i still on? host: go ahead. caller: congress -- i wanted to be bipartisan, and i want the working group to get activated. i have written to john kasich and john hickenlooper of colorado, they want to work on a health plan, so i'm asking them to work with the bipartisan working group and build a coalition with the problem solvers group, and be prepared for congress to take over the government next year, when we will be dealing with mental illness next year and our health plans and our national government, we will deal with people with mental illness. the congress have to get ready to take over. will you support and get congress to join in and make the bipartisan working group the power center for the congress to
take over operation of the government next year? rep. taylor: i am not sure about congress taking over the operation of the government next year, any more than it the legend -- than the legislative branch, but i think it is important to work in a bipartisan way. my freshman class does that. every bill we have put forth so far this year has a democrat cosponsor, sometimes it is harder to get them on board, but we can say that. i am not sure exactly what you are asking, but it is important that congress works in a bipartisan way for the american people. host: let's go to maryland. joey, hello. caller: good morning. i have a question. disingenuous and hear congress to continually refer to social security and medicare as entitlement programs. from my understanding of it, the
taxes taken from our income are for those programs. so it is not as if you are taking money from somewhere else to give to those programs. so i think, because that is the case, absolutely it is an entitlement program that should be zealously protected. furthermore, why not put your efforts toward recapturing the funds that have been taken from those programs. rep. taylor: thank you for calling. i appreciate it. i corrected myself when i said entitlement programs for social security, earlier, because you are paying into that directly for yourself. yes, there were previous congresses that have raided the fund. i do not know about recapturing it, but what i will say is i think there should be a lockbox on that moving forward, so that funds, the moneys collected better put into the fund should
have a lockbox so they cannot be used for anything else to ensure the sustainability of the program. i hope that answers your question. host: john on the democrats line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. hi. i have a similar question. it concerns social security and medicare. and also tax cuts. there is no way that those tax cuts are going to leave enough revenue for the government to be sustainable. and i am a paramedic and there is no way that i can work as a paramedic to the age of 70. it is impossible. there is no way for a workerchange like myself, working in that profession, until the age of 70.
there is no way the company or department is going to keep me until that age. i'm sorry, but the tax cuts, i are just repackaged just like the reagan and the bush, and it will leave us in the same hole all those others have left us in. rep. taylor: thank you for calling. we will disagree a little bit in terms of what that looks like and you having to work, i do not think it will impact that. we appreciate what you do. thank you. host: one of the jobs of congress given by the president was the future of daca recipients and he gave a deadline to come up with a solution. where are you on that, as far as congress on that? rep. taylor: i agree with the president met what president obama did was outside of its purview. i think it is in congress's purview. both republicans in charge and democrats in charge, they did not do what the issue. daca is not new, but neither
democrats or republicans dealt with the issue. the president kicked it to us because i think he is correct, there were legal challenges that would've forced it anyway. i also agree with the president that we should have a deal that gets more security and disincentives for further immigration, illegal immigration, but further deals with this population. there has been a lot of talk about merit-based immigration and i agree with that. but when you look at this population, they speak english, in general they are working and they are educated, not criminals by definition, said this is a and some of these folks are as american as you and i, they just do not have the citizenship. i agree with the president pushing it to congress and i agree there should be a deal that gets further disincentives for that you legal immigration
and it deals with this population. what ultimately happens, i am not sure, but i personally believe it should be a standalone thing that should get bipartisan support. i think the mcgrath and republicans -- think democrats distance andns security, advising immigration, but also dealing with this population. i was at the white house recently i talked with them and it looks like after taxes, that will be the next thing that is talked about, about a deal. it's important that we do that and there are a lot of folks in this population, classmates, it'syers, families, important that we deal with this. host: pennsylvania republican line, dave. caller: please don't cut me off, i have two questions. >> watch this online at c-span.org. we'll break away here, the house is galing back in for a series of votes.