tv Washington Journal Steven Dennis Kathryn Watson CSPAN March 12, 2019 12:17am-1:17am EDT
to highlight the president's life, career and legacy. aakers include speaker on his sense of humor, and another on how he is rumored in new deal america. david blight on lincoln's relationship with abolitionist frederick douglass, and another speaker on lincoln as president-elect. be sure to watch this weekend on c-span3. coming up next from washington journal, a look at the week ahead from washington followed by vermont senator bernie sanders visiting new hampshire for the first time since announcing his 2020 candidacy for president. later, a look at president trump's 2020 budget request with acting white house budget director and the debris secretary of state, john sullivan. " continues. host: each monday when congress
is in session, we like to take a look at the week ahead in washington and to do that, we are joined by steven dennis, bloomberg senate reporter. kathryn watson is the white house reporter with cbsnews.com. some images from capitol hill. the budget has been delivered to capitol hill and there is a shot of the budget on the desk. take us through what we should know about this budget. kathryn: first off, this budget is going to be requesting $8.6 billion for border security, specifically for a border wall. that is something that is not going to go over very well with house democrats who just have this fight over a national emergency, another thing we are going to be dealing with this week. $3.6 billionere, request in addition to that, to
repay those military thetruction funds from national emergency that the president kind of set into motion, another thing that is going to have contention. the budget does call for a lot nondefenseout 5% in discretionary funds. in addition, we have defense spending increases. another thing that is going to kind of rile democrats saying you are cutting here while boosting defense spending. host: steven dennis, how much of what is in that large document that was on the desk is likely to make it into the final document whenever the budget season end? -- budget sees an end? steven: it is the next big government shutdown --
government showdown that could end in a shutdown. it is unlikely that any of these domestic spending cuts are going to make it across the finish line. look at the last two years. the president has had two years of budgets were he proposed sweeping cuts to domestic programs and almost none of them happened. in fact the opposite happened. last year he had to deal with democrats to increase spending on nondefense. now he is saying he wants to go , butand cut spending again when republicans were in charge, he agreed to additional spending and now you have democrats in charge who want more spending. it is going to be hard to get any of the spending cuts done. what the democrats have demanded in the past is that if you want more for defense, they will demand more for domestic as well. that is sort of the big fight. you also have a big fight over the wall funding. one of the things that democrats could be looking for and what
could be real in addition to the is to look at some of the sugarplums in the budget. they'll be looking to see if there are particular projects -- there hased been a lot of talk of bipartisanship on infrastructure. also prescription drugs and a lot of hearings from both chambers to do something about the high cost of prescription drugs. they will be looking to see if there is more detail once those budget books come out, that can really get some of these bipartisan agenda items across the finish line. host: we will find out more those details. kathryn watson, how open is the white house to some sort of deal?
we have seen budget deals in the past, going into the 2020 election cycle, is the wife -- is the white house more or less likely to make a deal? kathryn: it is not going to be an easy battle. the administration says they're going to push for these 5% aggregate cuts. what that means is not necessarily every department. some may have more or less. that is something they are keen on because one thing that this budget does not do is it does not balance the budget. it would not for another 15 years which is for a long time. see,will be interesting to but this is their ideal version of what could happen and it is not what is going to end up in reality. we will see how much they are willing to fight and negotiate for.
it has been impressive to see, the last couple of months, the reality for republicans on capitol hill and the white house, realizing they no longer have control over everything. they no longer have final say. in theere some things past that were difficult when both chambers were controlled by republicans but that is compounded now. dennis, the reaction before these budget books made it to capitol hill. we saw reaction from leading democrats. steven: nancy pelosi and chuck schumer put out a statement rejecting this idea of an extra $8.6 billion for the wall. they say the president continues to push and demand that and will end up with another shutdown that he will have to cave on in the end. they are putting down markers very early. that fight is going to go on between now and september 30. one of the things that we are not really seeing a whole lot, whether it be from republicans or democrats is a push for real
deficit reduction. there is a lot on paper that not a whole lot of real meat that on capitol hill. host: explain what that means. steven: if you're only targeting defense discretionary programs, all of those programs put together are about half $1 trillion a year. muchan only cut them so with the deficit already heading toward a trillion dollars a year. those programs are all very popular on capitol hill. they include things like transportation and education. you will not be able to cut them much more and get that through congress and some of the big programs like there like medicare and social security, the ones that are adding to the deficit, the president has not been willing to go at those big giant programs that are
politically popular. unless the president were to do something very different in how he negotiates with congress. he has gone to the wall on the wall. he has not gone to the wall on the deficit or spending cuts. -- could spark a different conversation but he does not seem to be going that way. as you mentioned, we've got the election coming next year. do you want to have a big market fight over debt and the shutdown? the odds are low on that. host: more reaction from democrats on capitol hill. senator kamala harris tweeting yesterday when the storage at a coming out about the money in this budget for the border wall, let's get this straight. she tweeted billions of dollars on a border wall, american
taxpayers should not for the bill for the president jakey vanity project. from the head of the subcommittee in the appropriations committee that this budget would have to go through. she says as the department of homeland security appropriations chair, i am fighting to ensure our funding targets areas that will truly protect our country and not waste taxpayer dollars on trump's friend effective trump'sall -- ineffective border wall. .ost: democrats, (202)-748-8000 republicans, (202)-748-8001. .ndependents, (202)-748-8002 we are tracking the vote disapproving the president's emergency address.
steven: they president has already lost a number of votes, enough to pass this resolution. there has been talk behind closed doors on whether republicans would try to amend it and make it more to their likely -- liking but that seems unlikely. yorty have senators like susan havens -- you already senators like susan collins who want to vote on this resolution. you have rand paul who wants to vote on this resolution and express his view that this is not the constitutional way we should have power of the purse going to the president. this will be a very interesting vote. to some degree it is a free vote because the house has already
voted and they don't have a veto override majority. what mitch mcconnell said he will expect is that this will , go to thenate president's desk and not be overwritten in the house. how much political strength does the president have with these senate republicans? he is taking a risk if you go up against the president but on the other hand you have a lot of senate republicans who consider this emergency declaration to be constitutionally questionable or unconstitutional. it is going to be a gut check. host: are we still on track for a thursday vote on this? steven: with the senate, it could happen anytime. this is likely to be the get out of town vote. next week is a recess for st. patrick's day. it is likely to be at the end of
the week. host: kathryn watson, is there a number the white house is looking to avoid hitting when it comes to the number of republicans joining this resolution? kathryn: they would look for it and not pass but we are already past that point. really, it is to minimize the damage. in the white house have been lobbying members on to persuade if not them, to at least gauge where they are at. what the president does not want is to have as many as 10 republicans which is what rand paul said. it probably will not be that many. rand paul said it might be as many as 10 republicans that vote against this. we will likely see one or two more who have been questioning this and that is what the white house does not want. they want to minimize the damage . grudges wheno hold
it comes to these things and lindsey graham has been on record saying we will hold you to account, other republican senators. we will not forget this if you vote against the president. host: we will see mike pence -- will we see mike pence back on capitol hill ahead of this vote? kathryn: it is very likely. he has been the person the administration has sent. again, it is how visible do they want this to be? behind closeda doors not in public view kind of lobbying we are seeing. host: plenty more to talk about in washington but we will it you chat with some callers. first, in new york on our republican line. thing hasis whole confused me because i watched
one american news network every morning and they published a calculator with estimates from the department of homeland security. last year, $136 billion was spent to facilitate them. this year we have spent $50 billion to facilitate them. i am a little nervous here. this money ishere coming from when they are saying the president is taking a percentage out of each person's budget, out of each agency's work on hisder to border wall when we have spent all of this money and we are still spending this money on illegals and they still keep coming in and one more thing, a couple weeks ago, a democrat in caused 1.2id that it billion that -- cost $1.2 billion a week for the government to be shut down which
is more money than what the president actually wanted. it does not make sense. i'm going to hang up. host: let me see if we can help you with this. take us through some of the cuts in the budget and the costs and estimates on spending. trying to put this in perspective. steven: i don't know which figures she is citing as far as $136 billion. if you do have immigration that is not checked and somebody ends up in your school districts and you have to provide schooling or health care, there are costs. there are also costs at the border, the cost of border patrol, having a strong border. i think that is separate from what the president is doing. what the president is doing is he trying to get congress to fund his wall. refused toplicitly fund more than $1.375 billion in
additional wall construction money and he wanted more and he decided he was going to use his pen and unilaterally allocate $8 billion. several billion of which was tied to this emergency declaration. this has moved into a constitutional question and is probably going to end up in the supreme court and there are republicans who support the wall and voted for the wall, who are concerned that or don't believe that the president should have this authority, this ability to take the congress's power, it's chief power as the power of the purse and use this national emergencies act to fund his everyday priorities. republicans and democrats tell me, what if we have a president and they declare a national emergency on climate change and they decide
to transfer $100 billion or $200 billion? at what point does it become unconstitutional? at what point does it become too big of a grant of power? in the 90's, the supreme court looked at the line-item veto in the supreme court said you cannot just hand over your powers that way in the presidency. we are likely to see a court case on this but you have people like omar alexander going to the floor, urging the president to stand down, that there are other ways to get wall money. it seems very unlikely the president is going to listen at this point, but as this court case goes on, we get a court decision before september 30, that might make things easier. --t: our guest this morning
guests this morning, steven dennis with bloomberg. if you want to check out his stories. kathryn watson, we welcome for the first time. the white house reporter for cbsnews.com. our next caller is lisa. caller: i am with the lady who just called in and i was just wondering how this budget or what ever is going from $5 billion to $8 billion and where is all of this money coming from and do we really trust this president to be shifting money around wherever he wants to put it? the republicans are they areup because afraid to lose their job or whatever. kathryn: thank you for the call. what we are seeing in terms of the border wall funding is a $.6
billion is what the president is requesting. billionanother $8 through executive action last month. he decided to go ahead with it so this comes out to $16 billion but of course this current budget proposal has to pass through congress. this is the preferred way get any would like to sort of funding past is through the legislative process, something that is approved through both chambers. the funding that the president got through executive action is something that is not only going to be tied up in the courts, but we are seeing the senate finally voting against it this week . -- against it this week. to go8 billion will have through congress but it will be interesting because we have not seen exactly where all the money is going to ultimately come
from, that the president is getting from the pentagon through various funds. that is going to be a little bit for debate. it is going to be interesting. we will see a similar fight we saw in the last month for the border wall. democrats are not going to be ok with $8.6 billion for the wall. host: this is all part of a more than $4 trillion annual budget. the president releasing his budget to capitol hill. you saw some of the images earlier of the budget arriving and now members will dive in to the various aspects of that budget. charles is next in illinois, a republican. caller: good morning. with your guests being from bloomberg or cbs, c-span is only reporting this morning the liberal point of view of the half of the citizens out here watching your program
are liberal and the other half far as theirive as viewpoints and we on the conservative side are not being served today. all we are hearing is beating up on the president's budget. host: i promise if you listen, you will get a lot of information on the budget from two very good reporters who cover capitol hill and the white house. steven dennis, how long have you been covering capitol hill? steven: since 2005. in roll call,e cq covering the house, the senate. when you cover these budgets, you get used to the dead on arrival aspect to them. it does not matter whether it is republican, democrat, barack obama or george bush or president trump. they come out with these blueprints and most of what is in them does not become law.
there were a long list of changes to entitlement programs proposed every year that are not going to become law. it is just sort of the reality of congress and washington. it is hard to get things done whether you are president trump, or president obama. he had plenty of fights with house republicans and he lost a lot of them. now we are in a different era of divided government and so it is going to be interesting to see. we have had sort of a failure to launch as far as having some kind of bipartisan budget deal to kick off the new era. andad 35 days of shutdown no successful resolution. lawmakers,a lot of particularly republican lawmakers who wanted to cut a bigger deal that would deal with
spending caps so we would not have this six-month fight over how much we are going to spend on defense and domestic. that we could just deal with that early on and then once you reach the overall structure, the next six months are all about priorities and deals and instead we are facing six months of acrimony with a very difficult backdrop for the president. he has a lot of investigations, the house is sending a lot of subpoenas. you have them all the report coming out -- you have the mueller report coming out. host: kathryn watson, talk about your experience. kathryn: i have been covering the white house for about six months. before i was with cbs, i was at the daily caller. it is going to be very interesting. the president is not going to get everything he wants but
democrats are also not going to get everything they want. that is what this budget process is about. it is about compromise. we tend to focus on where that tension is going to be, and for better or worse right now, that is the president's priority and whether or not those are going to get past. host: the white house, the changes in jobs at the white house. as to bill shiley leave mutations director. can we talk about who is in the next to replace him? kathryn: we will see if somebody will replace him. the president has gone through a number of indications directors. the shortest lifespan was anthony scaramucci. president is really his own best communicator. anyone who steps into that role has a virtually impossible job.
the president wants someone who shaves his media coverage in a way that he likes better which is hard if not impossible for one person to do. we will see if there -- if anyone is replaced. at the time that shine left, there were no active discussions as to who would replace him. host: in terms of the administration's communicators coming to capitol hill, we will see a couple of them. wilbur ross is coming to talk about this issue of the senses and a citizenship test. steven: this is a very important question, whether the senses will ask people, are you a citizen or not and this is a big fight. republicans tend to like that question. the concern among democrats is that this will cause a lot of people not to answer the census.
if you are in an area that has a lot of people who are not citizens, whether they be illegal immigrants or illegal immigrants and they are scared off by that question, that could affect everything from congressional apportionment to how much money you get. this is a big fight and it is already in court. this is potentially going to the supreme court but this is a chance for wilbur ross to explain his side of things. i think the republican argument we haveould know where people who are citizens and where we have people who are not and then we can tailor policy that way. it is something that is very much a big fight. we know the census is going to be critically important especially in 2022 because after
the senses, states redraw districts and there is nothing that members of congress are more interested in is knowing whether they're going to have a job and in 2022, that could affect which states have an extra member of congress or not. the could affect how big or small your district is. expect a lot of interests. host: as usual, a very busy week ahead. we can chat about any of the topics we have discussed. you can give us a call. democrats, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. jeremy is here in washington, d.c., a democrat. caller: good morning. thank you for this opportunity. i really appreciate it. in the past week there was this paul manafort jail sentence and it worries me a lot.
it was too light of a sentence. he committed bank fraud, tax fraud, actively stealing from our military and veterans, our security and stealing from our citizens. tax fraud is not a victimless crime. he has committed witness tampering, considering this guy conspired against the u.s. government and he got 47 months in prison while antonio brown for posting a facebook live video. years at rikers island for allegedly stealing a backpack. kathryn watson, watching the fallout and reaction of the white house to the manafort sentencing. kathryn: this was a much lighter sentence than what was generally expected. people thought it would be a lot more than that, but i would
highlight that this is not his only sentencing. he will be sentenced again on wednesday. that is for some conspiracy charges. we will see what comes about of that. he faces up to 10 years, the most he can receive for those charges. he is going to face a much tougher judge when it comes to wednesday. judge jackson who has been the judge in roger stone's case. you are member ever than it has -- everything that has happened with this case and he has been impetuous and she did not take well to that. manafort is going to have a much harsher judge this time. it is going to be more than just those four years he is behind bars. host: steven dennis, quickly the reaction on capitol hill. steven: there is concern among democrats that the president could ultimately pardon paul manafort.
president has not completely ruled pardons out. there is a concern among democrats that the president has been thinking about pardons, maybe dangling pardons and that would be a reason for paul manafort to have lied to mueller's prosecutors. that is one of the charges, one of the crimes that mueller has accused him of. that is why his plea agreement fell apart. concern oneal capitol hill, especially the house judiciary committee which is looking at obstruction of justice and potential obstruction of justice. one of the things that richard nixon was going to be impeached on was dangling pardons. this is serious business. from an ways away actual impeachment fight but there are rumblings, subpoenas
being readied. there is testimony on the hill. you can imagine a scenario where several months down the line, if the president has not given up on pardons or continues to talk or not rule them out, it could be concerning to a lot of democrats. host: louisville, ohio is next. rick on the independent line. are you with us? stick by your phone. dennis is in arizona, line for democrats. caller: thank you for this opportunity. my concern is that national security is much more important concerning the grid improvement and -- rather than the wall. 100 million people could be put out of electricity with very little effort on a foreign power. we could have people starving
without electricity in los angeles, new york and chicago, with very little effort by an versus a wall that is less important for infrastructure maintenance of $8 billion. host: kathryn watson. i know we have not opened the books on the budget, but do we know if there is more money for great security? kathryn: that is something in the details hopefully we will find out today but that is something that is important. we have not heard much talk about that on capitol hill or in the white house. we will see what there is. host: steven dennis, you were jotting down notes. steven: i have seen hearings in recent years about this issue and it is important for folks to
have a lot more renewable energy and while the big fights is to get that renewable energy from windy and sunny places to places where people live. this is an interesting area. the whole electricity area is interesting and could lead to some bipartisan dealmaking. the last time nancy pelosi was speaker, she got an -- not an energy package deal with president bush. not everything in washington is partisan. last week you had the chairman of the energy committee in the senate holding a climate change hearing. you have people talking. host: she wrote an op-ed in the washington post with joe manchin. steven: exactly. are we going to see a green new deal? no, but we will see some actions that are concrete regarding
nuclear power, transmission lines, the grid, that both parties can agree on. it is definitely possible but it is going to be hard to do and as the president has said himself, it is very hard to do all of these dealmaking's if you are investigating everything. trade-off.t of a if we're going to be having these investigations and shutdowns, it is hard to come together and say let's have a 21st-century transportation system. rewrite ofa big prescription drugs. host: do you think this first step act was the last big bipartisan bill that is likely to pass before the 2020 election? steven: there were definitely several items that are moving along that both parties, a lot of senators are having quiet meetings right now on things like prescription drugs, things
like transportation, but whether we end up seeing something big, this is more like a small to medium sized ball. there are incentives for lawmakers in both parties to get some things done. the permit -- the president is starting -- is trying to garnish his record going into the election. -- cory gardner in calabash they will want to get some things done as well, so i do think there is opportunity. nancy has shown that she can cut deals if you come to her with something in return. she showed that with george bush and got the last minimum wage increase attached to the iraq war budget she did not like.
one of the things they are going to do this week is the dream act. this is something that pelosi passed out ofand the house in 2010 and he got filibuster in the senate. the president has been open to parts of that and he wants his wall money in return and he wants some changes. it will be interesting to see what happens on all of these issues. host: less than 20 minutes left in our week ahead. we will take as many of your calls as we can. kathryn watson you have dave in ohio, republican. caller: i would like to refer to something mr. dennis said earlier, referencing illegals counting for representation in the house and the electoral college and i don't think a lot of people know or understand that, when you consider that the latest m.i.t. reports on illegals tells us that between 20 million and 25 million
illegals are out there and if they are counting towards representation in the house of representatives and the electoral college, that is political power and the issue is, those are noncitizens impacting the power of the politics in our nation and i don't think a lot of people understand that. of 20ou get to numbers million, you are talking about more citizens then the state of ohio. more representatives are going to endeavor presenting illegals in our house of representatives in a state like ohio and many other states. kathryn: we don't have an exact estimate, an exact figure of how many people are residing in the country who came here illegally. one argument that could be made is that it is something the census could figure out but it would not be anywhere near accurate.
some of those numbers from butemia may be a little bit to get to the point of representation, that is the concern that some republicans funding,t perhaps various things could go towards some populations of illegal immigrants. this is the debate and obviously immigration being from -- probably the most hot button issue we have had over the last couple of years and we will see going into 2020. the president does not seem to be backing down on continuing to make this one of his most important issues. host: the migration policy institute trying to track these numbers and the latest estimates, 11.3 million, the unauthorized immigrant population. ohio where the viewer was calling in from, the
unauthorized population is --imate to be around 107,000 estimated to be around 107,000. it is a sizable number. the matter how you slice it. i think you are going to hear from wilbur ross when he comes to congress that we want to know where citizens and immigrants are and that there are reasons to do that that are valid. i think that the founders, when they talked about a sentence, they did not say of the rise immigrants or unauthorized immigrants, you could have a constitutional amendment that says we will only count people who are citizens or not. that would be harder to do. having a constitutional amendment is not easy or get the supreme court to say it means something else.
host: in oklahoma, paul is a republican. caller: good morning. i am just wondering, first off, i just looked it up and a yale estimates there are 22.8 million illegals in america and also did anybody ever have a problem about the executive order that oprah -- that president obama did that took $716 billion from medicare defund obamacare? i'll take my answers off the air. host: steven dennis, did you want to start? steven: that was not an executive order, it was part of the affordable care act. i cover that extensively -- covered that extensively. the bargain was that medicare doctorss, hospitals and
and drug companies are going to get 30 million new customers and so congress that if we're going to give you 30 million new customers, we are going to be paying customers instead of uncompensated care. groups were on board with the affordable care act because overall, they were going to get this additional money and the net for a lot of hospitals and doctors was, they would have more money because of all the taxes that were added as well. that was not been executive order. there are a lot of republicans who are opposed to the president's executive actions on immigration. he shielded about one million younger immigrants from deportation. a lot of republicans felt that that was unconstitutional and tried to defund that as well. that was a big fight about five years ago that almost led to a government shutdown. -- we havepublicans
been dealing with this sort of flip-flop situation where the democrats backed that executive action but they are not happy with this executive action. that executive action was less about spending money and the democrats saw that as using the president's inherent authority to have a discretion on prosecution. host: less than 15 minutes left in our segment. later this week the house is going to be considering a the sense expressing of congress on whether robert mueller's report should be made public. onmay the news on just -- meet the press when he was asked about and talked about if trump eventually testifies under oath on this issue. [video clip] >> i think it is a mistake and i don't think bob mueller should rely on written answers.
when you get written answers from a witness, it is really the lawyers answers as much as it is the client's and here, you need to be able to ask questions in real time. bobink the constraint that mueller is operating under is he had an acting attorney general who was appointed because he would be hostile to a subpoena on the president and now he has a permanent attorney general chosen for his same hostility to the investigation. i think the special counsel feels some time pressure to conclude his work and knowing that the white house would drag out a fight over the subpoena would be an issue as well. ultimately it is a mistake because the best way to get the truth would be to put president under oath because as he has made plain in the past, he feels it is probably fine to lie to the public. host: kathryn watson, have we
seen any reaction out of the white house? kathryn: this is not something the president is going to be amenable to. the has been this whole battle over whether he would talk to robert mueller. he is not without some sort of fight in which the democrats ok withry well lose being made to testify. as far as the mueller report goes, how this process is going to go is that when mueller's report is complete, the only requirement that he has under the special counsel statute is that he submit that to the attorney general. william barr has a lot of discretion as to what he does with that report. as people are calling for it to be made public, it is his decision whether he submits the full thing to congress, whether he just submits a portion of the report, a summary.
it is going to be interesting to see what we get and if congress does not get that full report, they are obviously going to try to subpoena that. it is going to be an intense fight. got: steven dennis, you've bill in pennsylvania, a democrat. caller: thank you for taking my call. this guy but i , one ofo ask your guest the republican congressmen outed all the testimony from bruce orr a couple days ago but i have not seen it anywhere. , he hadg to what i saw , who worksis wife for fusion gps, even after ste
ele was fired by the fbi, that he got a thumb drive from his wife and turned that over to the mccabe and that conspiracy kind of bothers me. if it is true, it bothers me. the second story i heard twice the last couple of days was that schumer and pelosi are teaming up and using congressional investigators to start trying to dig up dirt on aoc and congresswoman omar and that they are really looking at any way put the handcuffs on these two because they are really getting to be a problem, especially omar's ties to the muslim brotherhood and the stories have been out there and
it seems like more and more, buzz feed and the root and the blade will get the stories and then you never hear the main press talking about it. host: what have you heard? story, in that second have not heard of any effort by schumer or pelosi to investigate either of those members of orrress and as far as the story, there has been a lot of reporting on bruce and his wife who worked for fusion gps, a lot of republicans feel like there was a conspiracy of the fbi, so they wanted it investigated, so you have continuing letters, even to barr after he was orfirmed to continue to do investigate or have somebody investigate the fbi. this is something that has been sort of an issue for the last couple of years, where the
president and his allies consider this to be a quote, feel that and they the fbi has overstepped its authority to try and take down the president. ist is something that barr in a position now to either say one way or the other. he has a lot of credibility in the senate right now, and we will see what he does with this potential to investigate the fbi and how he does it or what he does. there are a lot of republicans who wanted a second special counsel to look at all of this. he has not been appointed one and there may not be a need for him to. he is coming in from the outside. that hegraham has said expects an sort of hopes that
and inll look into this his view, clean up shop. host: grand rapids, michigan is next. alice, independent. caller: i would like to know how they can even justify no money for the wall when they have had a secret slush fund for the indiscretions of congressmen. should the taxpayers have to pay for a congressman who cannot keep their horse in the barn. host: this issue of congressional payments for illegal disputes -- for legal disputes was part of that hr-1. can you talk through what they wanted to do with that? steven: they have changed the rules and so they have agreed that in the future, a congressman should take -- should pay their own way. overwas bipartisan outrage
how members of congress were able to avoid public scrutiny and have taxpayers foot the bill for whether you call it a settlement or a severance. a lot of euphemisms being thrown out there by some former members of congress after some of these things came to light. really something that is sort of, it shows how some reporting by a lot of our andeagues raised this issue congress is reacting and changing how it does business. i don't think you are going to see a whole bunch of secret settlements in the future. a couple years after the me too movement started, this is one of the things that has started to change over in that building behind you. , it is notcongress
the congress from decades ago misogynistic.ly i've used to work at rollcall pinups ofould have female staffers in it. 30 not used to be nearly as many women members of congress. -- there did not used to be nearly as many women members of congress. -- so they can get settlements or have a fair shake, but that is all going to be implemented. host: just a couple minutes left. republican. caller: good morning. as far as the mueller report, it might never come out except about two weeks before the election. i would not trust robert mueller
six inches. is whole democrat mantra just keep telling lies. if you tell a lie long enough it becomes the truth. that is their whole strategy. and stephen, i am from the city of chicago. 2.7 million people in the city. i would guarantee there is 450,000 illegals in that city and there are probably another 80,000 in the suburbs. they have been using this number, 11 million for five years. 5000 illegalswhen into the country every month. the can't be 11 million. this is from a boy from the city. host: the number is 487,000 unauthorized immigrants in the state of illinois. they are one of the ones tracking these numbers.
11.3 million is the overall number in the united states. the caller started on the timing of the mueller report. kathryn: the timing is something that we are just going to have to see. everyone is kind of waiting in the next weeks for this to happen but it is true that we may never see the mueller report or certainly the full extent of it. said he aims for transparency but is not required to do so. democrats are quietly pushing for as much to be made possible but it does not look great if there is no transparency and we don't see some version at least of this report. we will see something. it is just how much. host: steven dennis, what have we not talked about that is happening on your beat that we should be looking forward to? steven: one of the things in the senate potentially this week or when they come back from the
recess is whether mitch mcconnell is going to successfully use the nuclear option to dramatically limit debate on nominations. this is district court nominees and lower-level appointees, things like under secretaries of state and even lower-level officials. all those people can take up to 30 hours of time on the senate floor. couple going to see a circuit court nominees including -- a little bit of controversy over her remarks on rape when she was a columnist and also on the right, some people were worried about her on abortion. she will have 30 hours on the floor. circuit't change for court nominees but mitch mcconnell is insisting on changing it for district court nominees. these are lifetime appointments and they will have two hours on the senate floor if mcconnell gets his way. he needs 51 senate votes.
there are 53 senate republicans, so we will see what happens with that. it will be interesting to see if aople like susan collins and alexander are ok with using the nuclear option. it is not look like democrats are going to agree because they feel like mcconnell has abused the process. he has gotten rid of these things were you have circuit court judges coming to the floor without democratic support in their home states. that is something to watch for. if you are somebody that thinks the filibuster should be gone, the more times you go nuclear, the easier it could be for they could say20 you guys went nuclear three times or four times and maybe it is time for medicare for all. host: in the last 30 seconds, what is happening on your beat, kathryn watson? capitol hill democrats
like elijah cummings and -- demanding a slew of documents from the white house and from people affiliated with the president. this is teeing up one of the most intense battles we have seen in the past couple of years. it is going to be fascinating to see how the white house response. the white house counsel has said we are not going to hand over all of this information related to security clearances for jared kushner, he ivanka trump and such. it is going to be really interesting to see how this plays out. there are going to be subpoenas. host: you can see kathryn watson's report at cbs news.com. steve dennis is >> c-span's washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up tuesday morning, al green discusses his continued efforts to impeach president trump.
then, florida republican congressman talks about the u.s.-north korea relations after the recent summit. the center for strategic and international studies todd harrison and what is in president trump's budget request. watch washington journal live at 7:00 eastern tuesday morning. join the discussion. during this year's conservative political action conference, also known as c-pac, we asked attendees what does it mean to be american? >> that are so many things that i can say. i say standing with patriotism. how the patriots fought. this is an experiment that could have gone completely wrong and it didn't. people nowadays are trying to live their lives. we know about immigrants, talk
about how they fought to come to this country makes you more proud. the servicemen and women who have died for our country. i cannot say enough about what this country really is and the diversity. even with all the diversity, people are proud to be in america. >> american means freedome. freedom is not something that comes from our government. it is what is inherent as a human being. ours.re that is what american is. >> what it means to be in american means going back to our roots. a time where we are able to wi eld our guns the matter when, no matter where, following the second amendment. one other thing that makes us american is allowing our voices
to be heard. conservatives across college campuses. >> what it means to me to be in american is that we are fortunate to live with the united states constitution. with that, we have the privilege of the first amendment and second amendment, specifically allows us to settle our systems so in court we don't have to jump into foxholes, dodge bullets and stand in front of tanks. >> voices from the road on c-span. senator bernie sanders was in new hampshire this past weekend or his first visit to the state since announcing his 2020 candidacy for president. at this rally in concord, he spoke about universal health care, tax policy, and climate change, among other topics.