tv FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX March 1, 2015 6:00am-7:01am PST
i'm chris wallace. we have the results of the cpac straw poll and an exclusive interview with the hot property in the republican presidential race, wisconsin governor scott walker. you shot to the top of the polls in iowa. you're near the top nationally. how do you explain that? we ask him about comparing union protesters to isis. and whether he's changed some of his positions. question is it is about amnesty? governor scott walker, it's a "fox news sunday" exclusive. then, and 11th hour vote funds the department of homeland
security for one more week. but the standoff continues. >> i'm just saying to the speaker, get a grip. get a grip, mr. speaker. >> with the republican-led congress overcome its early fumbles. we'll ask the house majority whip, steve scalise. plus, with some democrats boycotting prime minister netanyahu's speech to congress, has support for israel become a political football? our sunday group weighs is. and our power player of the week, the people's diva, opera singer renee fleming puts me to the test. >> so i would teach you how to enhance that, how to increase the range. hello renee. >> hello renee. >> all right now on "fox news sunday." and hello again from fox news in washington. we begin with some breaking news. the top contenders for the republican presidential nomination spoke to the conservative political action
conference or cpac this week. afterwards they held a straw poll and here are the results. kentucky senator ran paul won for the third-consecutive year with almost 26% of the vote. but the big story now is the straw poll's runner up wisconsin governor scott walker. in the key state of iowa he leads all potential candidates by double digit and he's also moved into the lead in national poll. i went to cpac friday to talk to walker with his rise some controversies and his record as governor. governor walker, welcome back to "fox news sunday." >> good to be with you. >> you shot to the top of the polls in iowa. you're near the top nationally. how do you explain it? >> well i think a lot of people admire what had we did in wisconsin where we weren't just fighting for the taxpayers, we were winning for the taxpayers. after iowa, people admired it didn't know where we could run a
campaign could we win should we get in said we could. >> you're biggest deal at cpac is the fact you took on and beat the public worker unions in wisconsin. but this week you seem to compare that to taking on isis. >> i could take on 100,000 protesters i can do if same across the world. >> governor isn't there a big difference between protesters and terrorists? >> there is, absolutely. i made that clear and want to make it clear right now. i'm not comparing those two entities. what i meant is about leadership. the leadership we provided under extremely difficult circumstances, arguably the most difficult of any governor in the country maybe in recent times. to me i apply that to saying if i were to run and win and be commander in chief, i believe that kind of leadership is what's necessary to take on radical islamist terrorists. >> all right. let's talk about leadership. president of the united states right now would you commit u.s. ground forces to combat isis in any way, shape or form? >> i believe we should not take
any option off the table. i don't want to run in the war. i have a bunch of bracelets in my wrist of gold star families, people have given them to me at their funerals of their sons. i'm not eager to go to another one of these funerals in the future. but by the same token, i don't want any other men or women to die in vain. when we look at that and say there's radical islamist terrorist that's like a vierusvirus we have to do what it takes to make sure it doesn't spread. >> you're president today. you talk about leadership, would you commit u.s. ground forces whether it's a full-scale invasion, whether it's special forces would you commit u.s. ground forces to a combat roll? >> for me to do something like that would require a number of things. listening to the chain of command joint chiefs, national security advisers and others what's necessary and listening to the people who are actually out in the field is the best way to do that but then also bring together a coalition. certainly reaffirming our major asset, our major ally in the region that being israel.
other allies around the room. david cameron, the saudis and the turks. there's a way we can put together a global coalition to take this on. >> you have taken heat recently for refusing to say whether or not president obama loves this country and whether or not he's a christian and the conventional wisdom is either you're pandering to the obama haters or you're not ready for prime time. which is it? >> the answer is neither. i'm not going to take the manufactured media crisis and take and follow that path instead of going to the path they think americans want, which is leaders who will stand up and tell them where they stand on the issues that matter to tem. that family that's been out of work for the last six months can be a part of the recovery. to talk about how we'll take the power out of washington and put it in the hands of the hard-working taxpayers. those are the things people care about. after last week's visits to wisconsin and to michigan when i heard from people talk about what happened in washington, they said you need to push back
and say that's what the american people want to talk about, not this nonsense. >> i agree with you the question about whether or not obama is a christian was nonsense was stupid. on the other hand, the question about whether or not he loves the country, rudy giuliani said that at a dinner for you. it seems to me it's fair game to say to you after the dinner, what do you think about it? marco rubio, one of your potential contenders, i don't think there's any doubt he loves the country, i think his policies are wrong. isn't that a better, smarter way to handle that. >> yeah. let's be clear with the point of the mayor. the mayor wasn't speaking on my behalf. he can speak on his own. what i said repeatedly since that time as the president can, i don't question that. i think any person who is willing to put their name on the ballot has to have a love for their country. i don't contest that against anyone who is running for office out there. my point wasn't to get in the middle and say i want to lift the debate up to talk about issues that people really care about. i'm not going down that path.
i'm not making those arguments. i'll talk about the things that matter to everyday america. >> just to be clear because you seem to indicate it you think the president, president obama loves this country. >> i think again, he and anybody else who is willing to put their name on the ballot has to have a love for country to do that. >> you say that you're a fiscal conservative, but the latest projection two year out projection from the state of wisconsin is that you're going to face a $2 billion budget shortfall. that sure doesn't sound conservative. >> well, that's the state budgeting in the sense when the fall requests came in for every agency including those i don't control came out, that would be the total tally if i gave them everything. the budget i presented to the state legislature handles that two-year period with $130 million surplus, just like the last four years. >> part of the way you balance the budget, get rid of the $2 billion budget shortfall is that you cut funding, state funding for the university of wisconsin
higher education system by 13%, you cut funding for the state park system by 28%. governor, are those your priorities? >> what i'm doing with the university of wisconsin system, system i care about because i have a son who attends one of those campuses is i'm giving the same sorts of tools i gave the public education four years ago. they said that could devastate. i took away seniority and tenure. we can put the best and brightest in our classrooms. >> at the university of wisconsin says they have to raise tuition on students. >> but they're not. we have a two-year tuition freeze. going forward, we have a cap tied to inflation. we'll be much more affordable than most other campuses in america. the schools said it would lead to doom and gloom we are up. we believe it's about reform in washington. washington talks about cutting things. what we done in wisconsin is push reformings the reforms
that worked before will work here. >> while you rolled back collective bargaining rights during your re-election campaign, you said a right to work law for private unions would be a distraction. >> bring in another group of protesters and march behind to the capital would distract from all the other things, tax reform education reform, entitlement reform, all the things we want to do going forward. >> now, the republican legislature is fast tracking right to work and you say you're going to sign it. why the flip? >> it's not a flip. i was sponsor in the legislature, never said i would veto it. i asked them not to make it a distraction. i laid out my agenda. they're acting on that right now. now is the perfect time in the midst of the early things they brought up and the things that will come up -- >> why is it a distraction during the election campaign? >> i laid out early on the things i want to do with education reform tax reform, it intoment reform we laid out on the table. it's a perfect time now because
the legislature is not acting on those things in the budget and we'll sign it by next week. >> your critics accuse you of another flip. they note the fact that during the re-election campaign when you were running against a woman, you ran this ad. >> there's no doubt in my mind the decision of whether or not to end a pregnancy is an agonizing one. that's why i support legislation to increase safety and provide more information for a woman considering her options. the bill leaves the final decision to a woman and her doctor. >> do you believe that a woman has a right to end a pregnancy at any point during those nine months? >> well, i think ultimately i'm pro-life that's an unborn child. when i think of the ultrasound picture that my wife and i saw of our first son who is now going to be 21 this june it's indistinguishable not to recognize that's a human life. that's why i'm pro-life. my point is we acted on the grounds that we have legally to be able to act under the supreme court's decision. we'll act that way at the federal level if we were in a
position like that as well but ultimately it is a life. >> but ultimately it's her choice. >> legally that's what it is under the guidelines that was provided from the supreme court. >> and would you change that law? >> well, that's not a change you can make. the supreme court ultimately made that. i believe in the right to life and i believe that there are other things that can be done above the state and federal level. >> other the years you have supported comprehensive immigration reform and a right to citizenship for people who pay penalties this for the 11 million people who are in this country illegally. here is what you said to a wisconsin newspaper in 2013. >> can you envision a world where with the right penalties and waiting periods and meet the requirements where those people can get citizenship. >> sure, yeah. i think it makes sense. >> question, isn't that amnesty? >> i don't believe in amnesty. part of the reason why i made that a firm position is i look at the way that this president has mishandled that issue. i'm one of the governors that join, i was one of the first governors that joined the
lawsuit that has been successful, at least on this initial technicality and i hope we prevail throughout the courts. going forward the way to enforce it is not through amnesty. the better approach is to enforce the laws and to give employers job creators the tools to verify other things to make sure the law is being upheld going forward. >> can you envision a world where if these people paid a penalty that they would have a path to citizenship and you said, sure, that makes sense. >> i believe there's a way you can do that first and foremost you have to secure that border or none of these plans make any sense. >> but it's a little bit slippery here. back when you were the milwaukee county executive you actually supported the kennedy slk mccain comprehensive plan. tough enforcement, e-verify, the 11 million people here paid penalty, they get citizenship. >> no, i'm not talking about amnesty. the reason for that over time -- >> you said you supported it. >> and my view has changed. i'm flat out saying it.
candidates can say that. sometimes they don't. >> so you changed from 2013? >> absolutely. i look at the problems we've experienced over the last few years. i talked to governors on the border and others out there, people all across america and the concerns i have is that we need to secure the border. we ultima tly need to put in place a system that works a legal immigration system that works. get employers to verify. i don't think we do it through amnesty. >> are you surprised you have come under so much fire early and do you see it as a backhanded compliment the other side are afraid of you? >> there's no doubt about it. they look at wisconsin, we didn't win three times in four years, we won the highest percentage of any republican governor in the country republican votes. but that's not enough to win wisconsin. i had to take almost a 12-point margin within independent voters in the state of wisconsin, a state that hasn't gone republican for president since
1984, when i was in high school i had a full head of hair at that point. i think voters recognize that people in the center many ways what people on the base of the republican party want, that's not a litany of issues. what they want is someone who will fight and win for them, someone who will tell them what they're going to do and ultimately go out and lead. >> finally you are the son of the a baptist preacher and you say that you and your wife are waiting for guidance from the lord on whether or not to run. what is the role of faith in your private life and in your olympic life public life? >> god doesn't pick winners in politics. he calls us to be on his side. in this case, i think there are people of faith who can have a variety of political views out there. for us personally, we make important decisions like we did years ago to run for governor lot was about us praying for it whether it was god's will for us to run. when i got married and had children, we made other important decisions. same thing would be true. we're trying to discern this is
god's will for us to run and ultimately figure out the next step in terms of who is winning, it will be up to the voters. >> governor, thank you. safe travels. >> thank you. up next israeli prime minister, netanyahu addresses congress this week but some democrats plan to boycott his speech. we'll discuss what the flip means with u.s. relations with israel. plus what would you like to ask the panel about the gop decision to invite netanyahu without telling the white house? just go to facebook or twitter @foxnewssunday and we may use your question on the air.
there has now been injected a degree of partisanship which is not only unfortunate, i think it's destructive of the fabric of the relationship. >> national security adviser, susan rice, using some of the toughest language yet to criticize house speaker boehner inviting israeli prime min ter netanyahu to speak to congress on tuesday. it's time now for our sunday group, jason riley from the "wall street journal," former democratic congresswoman, jane harman, washington post column nis kathleen parker and charles lane also from the"the washington post"." we got these questions from facebook from karen who writes
what was the turning point for america where israel became the enemy of the democrats? what happened to respecting leaders that support america? jason, how do you answer karen? when did things turn so ugly between president obama and prime minister netanyahu? i think this has been building for some time. netanyahu is worried about the very existence of his country and that is what is driving this decision to come here and address congress. and foreign dignitaries have done this before. this is not unprecedented in any way and we have to remember like the questioner said, the enemy is iran, not israel. and i think those people who are making a show of boycotting this speech are giving comfort to the enemy in a sense. >> congresswoman, harman you're a big-time supporter of israel do you have any problem with boehner inviting and netanyahu accepting this speech? >> let me say giving comfort to the enemy is strong. i don't agree with that at all.
democrats in congress love israel too. our relationship with israel depends on a strong bipartisan relationship. having said that if i were a member of congress now i would attend the speech but i think that the timing and the process of setting up the speech was poor. and that netanyahu would have been advantaged if he had decided in the last month or so to say i will come after the election with the unity government. i'm sure i'll be part of that government. he would look much more like a statesman and that i told that exact view to intelligence minister who asked me a month ago what i thought he should do. >> what did he say? >> he said he would pass it along and said he had passed it along. obviously the prime minister doesn't agree. we are where we are. but the big deal is that democrats and republicans love israel and all of us care about the threat to israel from iran. >> let me just say because the real issue here isn't the speech. the real issue here is the nuclear deal that the west and
that the u.s. and our five other allies, although china and russia, the five other countries are trying to negotiate with iran. here is what president obama said about where that deal stands this week. >> i gave an update and assured him that our goal here is to be able to verify that iran does not have a nuclear weapon. >> kathleen that's the concern that where this began as an effort to dismantle iran's nuclear program now you hear the president talking about making sure that iran doesn't, present tense, doesn't, have a nuclear weapon. >> right. it's such a complex thing because the president long ago said we can't trust iran to not try to pursue nuclear arms. we understood that. now we need iran to support us in our pursuit of isis so we have multiple moving parts. as for netanyahu's speech, i feel like it was his invitation
to decline. this is not the first time the house boehner in fact has invited netanyahu to speak. back in 2011 he asked and he went to the white house and specifically asked whether that would muck up what were then sensitive iran negotiation and the white house got back -- well, it didn't get back for an entire month. then when they did the response was it's up to you. we're going to leave it in your court. so this time i don't think boehner felt like they had to consult with the president. they did give the white house a heads-up before they announced it albeit only an hour before, but this whole -- all this distress over the protocol is sort of missing history here. >> i would just add, this is not -- republicans aren't the only ones concerned about this deal. the top-ranking democrat on the senate foreign relations committee, robert menendez is concerned about this deal. the idea this is a partisan effort to go after obama is not true. congress is a co-equal branch of the government.
the the administration is so confident that this deal is so air-tight and it's arguments are so forceful, why is it afraid for congress to hear another perspective? >> let me bring in chuck. let's get off the speech and talk about the deal. and what do you see happening here because it seems to me that as this plays out this could get very dicey. what if congress imposes more sanctions, what happens on march 24th if they do or don't get a deal and if all of this falls apart, are we prepared to go to war? >> well the march deadline is really kind of an interim squishy deadline because the ultimate tap is june when supposedly the thing would all fall -- >> the president has said, he has a sense that there's an agreement in principle. >> right. now, already they've disarmed, so to speak congress a little bit because the bill to impose additional sanctions was withdrawn and they're not going to do that. the next piece of legislation that's in the works would give congress a say this has been --
a bipartisan bill that's moves in the senate, give congress a say in the final deal. to me the key element of this whole thing is what happens to all the sanctions, including the u.n. security council sanctions. if those are all removed a the beginning of the deal as opposed to -- >> i think it's supposed to be phased in. >> that's what obama wants. >> right. >> that's what the u.s. is insisting on. the the iranens won't agree to that then the deal there fall apart. >> the deal won't fall apart. the new legislation was just introduced friday. it's a new corker/menendez bill. it removes the president's about to wave limited amount of sanctions first 60 days after the deal. congress will review the deal and they will decide whether that waiver is okay to add sanctions. >> you might have to keep congress out of this. >> congress can't be kept out of it. i actually think that's a pretty strong idea, better than the one they had which is congress is at the negotiating table. that's unprecedented.
this way i think this actually could strengthen the administration's hand in getting a better deal. there needs to be a strong deal or no deal. >> we're in the weeds a little bit. let's step back and look at the big, big picture here. what has happened, the united states and israel are at each other's throats. republican and democrats are at each other 's throats. the countries within the sunni middle east are at each other's throats. the only person sitting back watching all of this very happy about all this division is iran. and at some point this process got out of congress and started generating a tremendous amount of conflict and division among u.s. by the way some of the european countries france is not terribly happy about the way this negotiation is going. so, at some point president obama is going to have to start moving in the direction of pulling all his people back together lest the deal fall apart, we get nothing out of it on the nuclear side and iran has
managed to divide us. >> very uncomfortable playing that role. i think he sees the u.s. as the biggest force of instability on this planet. and that's a problem. he's uncomfortable being the leader of the free world and it has both our allies and our enemies worried. it's not just iran that notices this. netanyahu notices it which is why he's coming over here. putin notices it. i think he is fundamentally uncomfortable in this role and that's a problem. >> i agree, that's true. >> i disagree. i think he's trying to build the biggest coalition possible against isis and doing a careful job of that. we had a visit last week from the amir of cutter erkwa ta who is in that coalition and trying to make sure they're against gifts to terror organizations and that they have cracked down on this. but in any rate, i think that obama understands america is an indispensable partner in this entire region and figuring out the way forward is hard.
>> kathleen parker, final word. do you think the president is getting played by iran? that he is more anxious for this deal than everybody else is? >> well i don't know if i would say he's getting played by iran, but i think he's not taking into consideration all the facets of this that he should be. and as to his willingness to be a leader in this, i think it comes down to a difference of approach in all things. president obama is just much more attuned to the round table where we all sit down and sort of hash things out together where as israel is threat at all times and so you can't bridge that gap, i don't think, except to -- look, to the leadership questions obama could have said about netanyahu, fine, let the speaker meet with him. what's wrong with that? >> very good question. we have to take a break panelists. see you later. up next, congress avoids a shutdown of dhs with a one-week extension.
what does that say about the new republican majorities ability to govern? we'll ask house gop whip, steve scalise, next. it can feel like this. copd includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. spiriva is a once-daily inhaled copd maintenance treatment that helps open my airways for a full 24 hours. spiriva helps me breathe easier. spiriva respimat does not replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms. tell your doctor if you have kidney problems, glaucoma, trouble urinating, or an enlarged prostate. these may worsen with spiriva respimat. discuss all medicines you take even eye drops. if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells you get hives, vision changes or eye pain or problems passing urine stop taking spiriva respimat and call your doctor right away. side effects include sore throat cough, dry mouth and sinus infection. nothing can reverse copd. spiriva helps me breathe better. to learn about spiriva respimat slow-moving mist
action on immigration, joining us now from new orleans, house republican whip steve scalise. congressman, you kicked the can down the road on dhs funding but what's going to be any different five days from now? won't you be in exactly the same fix that you were this last friday? >> well, chris, it's good to be with you. and what we did is passed a bill that now forces the senate to vote on going to conference. we actually passed a bill that pushes back on the president's illegal actions on immigration. they made changes to that bill that we don't like. the way congress works when the house and senate have a disagreement, you go to conference. so monday the senate will be taking that vote. >> but, house democrats say -- senate democrats say they're not going to go to conference. so aren't we going to be in exactly the same situation when the funding runs out next friday, five days from now? >> no because just two weeks ago senate democrats said they wouldn't take up the house-passed bill and sure
enough friday they did take it up and voted on it. i would encourage anybody who disagrees with the president's illegal action on immigration like i do light up the senate switchboard between now and monday evening when they take that vote and put the heat on senate democrats to stop blocking this and join us and a federal judge, by the way, who also agreed that the president doesn't have the authority to do this. >> all right. house democratic leader nancy pelosi backed this one-week extension and she wrote this to her members in trying to get them to vote for this one-week extension, your vote tonight will assure that we will vote for full funding, that's through september next week. question, have you and the other republican leaders made any commitment to nancy pelosi that you'll have a vote for full funding this next week? >> no, and in fact there was a vote for full funding on friday and we rejected that. so the next step is that the senate will have a vote on their floor monday afternoon to go to conference and i would urge senate democrats to stop blocking this. let's go to conference and work
out these differences and finally put a check on this president that he himself said 22 different times he doesn't have the authority to write his own immigration policies. we're going to keep fighting this battle. >> there's another issue that's out there. there's a lot of talk that speaker boehner is going to put a clean bill, a bill that would fund dhs through the end of suspect without any linkage to rolling back the president's executive action on immigration, and that he's going to put that on the floor this week. if he does that will he lose his job? >> well, chris, there is no such deal and there's no such bill. like i said friday there was a bill on the house floor to pass a clean funding bill. and we rejected that because we said we're fighting the president on what he's done illegally on immigration and we want to continue this battle and go to a conference committee so we voted to go to conference instead of that clean bill and now the senate is forced again to take a vote on monday whether or not to go to conference.
i would urge them to do it. i would urge senate democrats to stop blocking our actions. stand with the court and stand with the constitution and let's go enforce the rule of law. >> there's a lot of talk that the so-called freedom caucus that's about 50 of the more hard-lined more conservative republican members are talking about going after john boehner's job as speaker. how seriously do you take that talk about a revolt? >> we had that week a few weeks ago and that vote is over. >> you're talking about the vote to make him speaker? >> that's correct yes. and obviously he's speaker. he's going forward. and he's working hard to get our agenda moved through the house and we've already seen some good action. we moved the keystone pipeline bill. the president vetoed but he finally had bills like that on his desk. we also passed other bills to get our economy moving again and we're working on a budget right now where we can finally get control over washington's spending and get a controlled budget. we're not slowing down we're
moving forward. >> forgive me, congressman and i understand it's your role to put the best face on things, but people are talking about what happened on friday night as a humiliating defeat for the house republican leadership. you wanted a three-week extension and 52 members of the house republican caucus, 52 of your own members, ended up voting against your own measure that the leadership put out. and let me talk about your responsibility because you are the tea party favorite, if you will who will join the leadership with the assurance that you were going to be able to bring more conservative members to back the leadership. you're also as the house whip, the person who is supposed to count the votes. what happened? >> chris, our goal last week was to pass a bill that funds the department and continuing a fight with the president which meant the next step was after the senate had taken language out out of our bill that we had passed that pushes back on the president's actions we wanted to go to conference.
we didn't want to accept what they did. >> i ubs that but you put up a bill for a three-week extension and you were defeated and defeated basically by your own caucus, 52 republicans. what happened? >> well first of all about 80% of our conference voted for this strategy, including some of our most conservative members and we did pass a bill to keep this fight going through next week. monday is that vote now. we forced a vote in the senate. so obviously our members have a lot of differences on how maybe we want to go about tactics. but our goal is the same. our goal is to fight this president's illegal actions on immigration and we're now in a position to force the senate to go to conference committee which was what we wanted to do all along last week when they rejected our language. >> you can't force them to go to conference they're going to vote on it they're going to defeat it and forgive me you'll be back in the same situation. >> i wouldn't presume that because again two weeks ago the senate democrats said they weren't going to take up our bill, chris sure enough on friday they were forced to take up our bill and so now they
might say whatever they want to do but there's going to be a vote. it's important for people that agree with us that the president doesn't have this ability to put illegal immigration laws in place executively, they need to light up the senate switchboard and make those senate democrats feel the heat who have been standing with the president on his illegal actions. >> all right. let me change subjects on you. israeli prime minister netanyahu accepting an invitation from speaker boehner is going to address congress, joint session speech on tuesday morning, and he is going to talk about how terribly he thinks the deal is that the u.s. and the west is now negotiating with iran. let's play this out. he asked congress to oppose more sanctions. the talks break down. iran begins to get ramp up. it's nuclear program. what happens then? are you prepared to take this country to war to bomb, to
attack iran's nuclear program? >> well, first, chris, i welcome prime minister netanyahu. i think it will be a critically important speech that not only people throughout america will be watching i think people all throughout the world will be watching this because they understand how important this threat is of a nuclear-armed iran. and so while the prime minister has serious concerns about this negotiation, i share those concerns. and frankly we saw the sanctions working well, so well that iran came to the table unfortunately the president removed those sanctions. >> sir that's not true. he didn't -- >> stop the nuclear program. >> he did not remove -- they relaxed some of the sanctions but most of those sanctions are still in place. and the question i have for you is -- >> but they took some of that pressure off. they want to increase that pressure. >> but if the talks break down, are you prepared -- it's a pretty straight-forward question, are you prepared to vote to take this country to war against iran? >> i'm prepared to continue doing what we need to do to stop iran from getting a nuclear weapon. there's strong bipartisan support in congress for
increased sanctions against iran. >> what about war? >> i think you heard that. i think what we need to do is keep the sanctions going. the sanctions were working. you want to prevent war, you talk but you also have to back it up with actions. in increased sanctions, back it up with -- >> that has to be a top prior twi this administration. the fight with islamists is a critical fight and nuclear-armed iran ought to be a major concern. they're moving forward. we have to roll that back. >> finally congressman, we haven't talked since the story came out that back in 2002 you spoke to a group that was founded by david dub, the former plan leader. you say that was a mistake that you regret. my question was, since that came out in december have you made an effort to mend fences especially with the african-american members of the house? >> sure, chris.
and i made it very clear that i rejected bigotry of all forms. and so we continued to build relationships and focus on things that we can do together to get our country moving forward and solve problems where we have joint agreement. i've been very proud of the a lot of the work i've done in new orleans. i was on the board of teacher of america. we transformed a failed public school systems in the city of new orleans. now we have a system where kids who were before were being denied opportunities for educational advancement are now getting great options where their parents can have schools competing for those kids. i want to continue doing good work like that where we can expand opportunities for all americans. that's what we're fighting for. >> congressman scalise, thank you. thanks for joining us today and we'll stay on top of the new dhs funding deadline which is next friday. thank you sir. >> it will be a full week. great being with you, chris. >> you bet. congressional republicans get their act together and show they can govern? plus, will foreign contributions to the clinton
foundation be a problem for hillary clinton's presidential campaign. we'll bring back our panel to discuss both. what do you think? do you see a problem with the clinton foundation taking donations from other governments? let me know on facebook or twitter @foxnewssunday and use the #fns. the future of the market is never clear. but at t. rowe price we can help guide your retirement savings. our experience is one reason 100% of our retirement funds beat their 10-year lipper averages. so wherever your long-term goals take you we can help you feel confident. request a prospectus or summary prospectus with investment information, risks, fees and expenses to read and consider carefully before investing. call us or your advisor. t. rowe price. invest with confidence.
it's the 11th hour and we must act to provide with defending our home turf. >> this is really really amateur hour to the enth degree. >> hall rodgers and nancy pelosi both expressing frustration over the dhs funding stalemate and we're back now with the panel. kathleen, how much of a mess? and what do you think of these
reports of john boehner's job might be in jeopardy? >> it's a mess because the republicans have put themselves in the position of being seen as the obstructionists. the people who can't govern, who can't contrary to what scalise just said, move forward. obviously his goal and the goal of the republicans this time around at least this past week was simply to get the senate to vote onning? something. they wanted to sort of spread the blame around i think a little bit. and as to boehner's problems of leadership, i think it's a less a problem of his leadership than it is a problem of the 50-person crowd who are never going to vote with anyone. they're always -- they're there to vote against. that's what they came to office to do and that's what they're going to do. think think when they fail, they want to fight these unwinnable battles. when they fail to win, such as tying health care to funding last year and when ever that was and now this, the immigration issue they can't win these
things and yet when they can't win them, they blame leadership instead of understanding that it's their own amateur hourness that's getting in the way. >> all of you rousers who are indulging in amateur hours please send your e-mails to kathleen parker. >> we're already in contact. >> chuck, i talked with quite a conservative republican member of congress this weekend and he said the problem is we don't know how to surrender. we don't have the votes to force the democrats and to force the president, you know to roll back the immigration executive order and the problem is we're just stringing this out for another week. is that fair? >> it's almost like they're bleeding themselves at this point. the irony is they had such a great off ramp available when this federal judge essentially stopped the president's immigration action in its track. it's not going into effect. it's not happening and in fact it's in a bit of limbo while that whole thing goes on.
as senator mcconnell said, this is the perfect out for the republicans and this is just a measure of i guess, the nice way to say it as the high hi principled stand of this freedom caucus the utterly lacky and preg matism stand is they won't take that and as a result you have the situation where they're just going to bleed more and more. people talk about boehner being throughout out. at a certain point i wonder why he wants the job anymore. >> no kidding. >> you want to say something because i want to turn to another subject. >> boehner's best move so the put the full funding bill on the house floor. he put a three-week funding. >> you don't think there will be a revolt? >> i think 50 people will be mad as hell. he will enhance his chances of surviving hi leader and let's put america first instead of talking about who to blame. >> talking about putting america first i want to turn to the report this week that the
clinton foundation has been accepting millions of dollars in contributions from foreign countries, including one from algeria that apparently violated the fx deal that the clinton foundation made with the obama white house when hillary clinton first game into office as secretary of state. here is what potential republican candidate had to say about that -- >> explain why we should accept that the millions and millions of dollars that have flowed into the clinton foundation from foreign governments do not represent a conflict of interest? she tweets about women's rights in this country and takes money from governments that deny women the most basic human rights. >> congresswoman harman are you troubled by these donations going to the clinton foundation? >> yes. there was a process set up.
all the other contributions were reviewed, as i understand it. there was transparency. this was an unsolicited contribution of $500,000 at a time when u.s. was dill used with help for haiti. i guess it got lost in the system. i think it needs to be explained. i don't understand why the money wasn't returned or in some way after the fact approval wasn't sought but i assume the foundation will explain it. i just want to add chris that the wilson center accepts small amounts of foreign money but we have board approval and full transparency. >> yeah, but you're not running for president. and that's the question. these millions of dollars from -- maybe you are running for president. >> i am president of the wilson center. >> but here is the question, hilary clinton is going to run for president and the clinton foundation is continuing to accept millions of dollars in donations from countries a lot of which like algeria, like ka tar have issues with the united states, have human rights
problems. do you think that should continue on? and aren't they in a way trying to buy influence with hillary clinton by cricketontributing money to the foundation that has her name on it? >> i think appearance is poor and the process they have, what that is, needs to be fully disclosed and there has to be absolute transparency and people will make judgments for themselves. but foreign governments giving limited amounts of money to groups if fully disclosed and if approved i think is certainly in the context of the wilson center okay. >> jason, but again it's a different situation. let me just ask you this, a foreign government, any foreign contribution to an american political candidate is forbidden by law, so should it be all right to give money to a foundation that has the candidate's name on it? >> well i'm not a lawyer but -- >> i'm not asking you as a lawyer. >> i mean, i think the appearance of impropryty here is
everything and it's coming from liberals who like to lecture us how money corrupts politics. during the mid-term elections any politician who took money from the coke brothers were bought and paid for. hilary clinton is taking money from algeria qatar and kuwait. then we find out that her foundation is taking this money. and again i think the clinton foundation is less a charity than a political group. basically a superpack put in place to help hillary clinton politically. >> you have half a minute. >> perception is everything and that becomes a reality. it's a big problem for hilary clinton. it cuts to her question of judgment. all of this could have been preempted had she not insisted as having her name as part of this foundation. >> one last point in 1996 the clintons had a big problem with alleged foreign money coming
into the dnc and their campaign operation from china, et cetera. this is going to remind everybody of that. >> in one second the clinton foundation has done a lot of good in the world. >> they sure have. >> that must be said as well. >> all right. i love the fact that there were three final statements here. thank you panelists. see you next week. up next our power player of the week the people's diva gives me a singing lesson. ♪ >> are you tenor? >> i don't know what i am. i used to sing in a bathroom.
all right, i admit it i don't like opera. hours of people howling in a language i don't understand. but if anyone will ever get me to change my mind it's our power player of the week. ♪ >> i have really been able to transfer into that extraordinarily other worldly creature, other than i hope on stage. ♪ >> renee fleming has been called the people's diva. it's a title she loves. ♪ >> yes, she is america's leading opera star, who has played 54 different roles. but she prides herself on being down to earth. are you at all a diva? are you difficult?
>> am i a diva? there are people who probably had their moments with me. a lot of bad behavior in singers is caused by nerves, but my philosophy is that the people around us are there doing as much work if not more work behind the scenes and they're the last people you would be unkind to so i hope i'm not a diva off stage. ♪ i want to live ♪ >> she made a point of going beyond opera, singing rock and jazz and last year becoming the first classical artist to sing the national anthem at the super bowl. >> in those two minutes, which have to be perfect or it will follow you for the rest of your career, i can't say i've had another experience quite like it but it was thrilling. >> whatever the venue, fleming is also known as the beautiful voice. ♪ how is it that you're able to
create this remarkable sound? >> my singing voice is horrendous, right? >> no. >> but i mean it's sort of weak and it's not very resew nant, but when i sing the sound is a totally different range color, all of it. it's all about the breath. you take in a breath and you make a sound. so for instance, if you say, hello renee. try that. >> hello renee. >> so i would teach you how to enhance that how to increase the range. >> hello renee. >> hello renee. >> are you a tenor? >> i don't know what i am. i used to sing in a bathroom. >> just try a siren. ♪ >> no i'm not doing that. master class aside fleming who just turned 56 says she'll retire from opera within three years and just do recitals. >> my whole career i played these girls sort of 18 to 23.
so, you know, and we can suspend disbelief to a point and then you sort of think okay that's enough of that. >> but don't worry the people's diva will continue to share her remarkable talent. >> it's just something incredibly moving that the human being, a human being can make this sound and that great music has been cultivated around it. so i feel very privileged to be doing this. >> this april fleming opens on broadway in a comedy called "living on love." her role, an opera diva. and that's it for today. have a great week. and we'll see you next "fox news sunday."
a gesture of gratitude makes him an internet sensation. the way joe bell will be remembered with a race today. good morning. look at that beautiful shot over the water this morning. sun is shining today but what a crazy day of weather we had yesterday. >> good way to end february with a little thunder and lightning. >>