tv Face the Nation CBS March 26, 2017 10:30am-11:30am EDT
defiant note. >> the best thing we can do politically speaking is let obamacare explode. it is exploding right now. >> dickerson: but it is not the only thing exploding. new revelations in the investigation into whether or not trump campaign officials colluded with the russians to influence the election sparked a partisan brawl in the house. fbi director comey confirmed what washington has been talking about for weeks, that the fbi is looking into those ties and said flat out there was no evidence to support president trump's claim that president obama had wiretapped him. >> the fbi and the department of justice have no information to support those tweets. >> dickerson: house intelligence chairman devin nunes did find new information relevant to the investigation. >> on numerous occasion it is intelligence community incidentally collected rminfon atiotabou u.s. citizens involved in the trump transition. >> the president also -- collection with indication -- >> yes. >> dickerson: il
top democrat on the intelligence committee adam schiff why the chairman's revelation threatens to undermine the house investigation. schiff's republican intelligence committee colleague trey gowdy responds. >> conservative senator tom cotton who warned his house colleagues not to walk the plank and vote for a bad healthcare bill will also be here. plus have an interview with ronald reagan's secretary of state george schultz who has some advice for president trump. >> trust is the coin of the really gloom and cover the rest of the week's events with our political panel, including the bright spot for the president, supreme court nominee neil gorsuch appears to be coasting to confirmation despite a filibuster threat from democrats. >> i have a candidate, can, canon of ethics that precludes me from getting involved in any way, shape or form in politics. >> dickerson: if true to his word he will be the only one in partisan washington who does. iit is all ahead on "face the nation". good morning and welcome to "face the nation", i am john
is in full swing here in washington after the obamacare repeal's failure. the president immediately blamed the democrats. but it was his own party largely a coalition of house conservatives known it is a freedom caucus who refused to support the bill. we begin with arkansas senator tom cotton who is a vocal critic of the bill, senator, welcome. in the washington examiner phil klein writes the headline to his piece, gop cave on obamacare repeal is the biggest broken promise in political history. what is your reaction to that judgment? >> well, john, first to say the president is right that the democrats gave us obamacare and the failure of the bill this week doesn't solve the problems of obamacare, it is continuing to get worse and our healthcare system is groaning under the weight of obamacare so we have to revisit it and now have the time to do it in a more deliberate and careful fashion but ultimately i don't think you can lay the defeat of this bill last week on any single faction in the house of representatives some conservatives opposed it, some moderates opposed
a chairman men of powerful committees opposed it, the problem is the bill and process, healthcare is a very complicated issue to release a bill written in secret and expect to pass it in 18 days, i just don't think is fees gloobl so you said written in secret, well senate on paul ryan then, he controls that process. so are you saying basically that the house leaders, the house speaker did it -- the process was poorly handled? >> i think you can't expect to try to solve a problem that addresses one-sixth of the country's economy and touches every american in a very personal and intimate way and 18 days, when the democrats came to power in 2009 for 60 years at least they had been pursuing a national healthcare system, yet they didn't introduce legislation for eight months and didn't pass it for over a year of barack obama's first term, so it went through very public hearings and took testimony, developed fact based foundation of knowledge, president obama traveled around the country around town hauls and spoke to a joint session of congress, i am not saying we
to do this but i think a more careful and deliberate approach which we now have time to do because we have to the revisit healthcare anyway would get us further down the path to solution. i believe both moderates and conservatives made a lot of concessions already, i have friends like jim jordan in the freedom caucus and jim dent, they are good men and want to work together and find a solution that both they and everyone inbetween can agree to with time i think we can do that. >> dickerson: so your judgment, so-so nobody mistakes your message is the house rushed it? >> i think the house immediate bit too fast, 18 days is simply not enough time for such major landmark legislation. >> dickerson: the president this morning, know is actually pointing fingers at the freedom caucus and said, quote, democrats are smiling in dc the freedom caucus with the help of the club for growth and heritage have saved planned parenthood and obamacare. what do you think about that? >> again, you know, it wasn't just conservatives in the house, in fact i think more nonconservatives than conservatives opposed it and
the house appropriations committee one of the most powerful positions, the problem really is not with a specific faction in the house, i think it is with the bill. >> dickerson: let me get your experience from that town hall that everybody saw, that was woman who stood up and said that she would be dead were it not for obamacare. the president has said that he is going to wait for obamacare to explode and collapse and then it will get fixed. how would that go over with that woman at that town hall or the other people? >> well i think the president is simply stating a fact that obamacare continues to get worse, premiums continue t to go up every year, when you get to new open enrollment system, some states have only one inshun, insurer which is a monopoly, one thing that can happen while congress deliberates over healthcare is phase 2, secretary of health & human services tom price can undertake regulations designed to lift some of the worst harms of obamacare and try to give some people relief. later this year, we have must
pass healthcare legislation that is coming up that children's health insurance programs is very important to a lot of dependent, by that pointer i hope we can reach some kind of consensus where we can try to do away with the worst problems of obamacare,, the only be addressed by legislation. >> dickerson: here is what i wonder about is the people at the end of these policies and that you dealt with in those town hauls is when they hear the president say i am going to let it collapse and then the democrats will beg me to fix it. but when people who are out there nervous about this who have obama care, people are straight up nervous, isn't that a nervous making thing to hear? >> well, as i said, as in the stated time obamacare comes up as topic in arkansas i know some people were helped by obamacare, but many more were hurt by it and those are the people we need to keep in mind when we are trying to solve the problem for people who benefited from obamacare without imposing all of the costs that obamacare did, and the president simply state ago fact that entire healthcare system is growing under the weight of obamacare, we don't have a choice to revisit or not
>> dickerson: let me ask you finally about mosul, there are reports that 200 civilians have been killed as a result of a bombing in mosul, perhaps from an american air mission there. is this a result of the loosening of rules of engagement and how should people think about this? >> very sad development, obviously the department of defense is investigating, i don't believe this is as a result of any kind of loosening of rules of engagement. rather i think it is simply the facts on the ground for much of the last part of last year, the fighting was in east mosul which is a much smaller less densely populated area, now it is in west mosul which is a more densely populated area, the ultimately the blame lays with the islamic state, they fight from apartment buildings and homes, mosque, hospitals and schools and so forth. the blame does not lay with coalition pilots or with our, iraqi forces an investigation will occur but ultimately it is the terrorist whose are using civilians to shield that are responsible for the deaths. >> dickerson: senator cotn
thank you so much for being with us. >> thanks, john. >> dickerson: for more on the investigation into possible ties between trump campaign officious and russia, we are joined now by the top democrat in the house, intelligence committee, california representative adam schiff. palo alto, congressman i want to start with something chairman nunes of the committee said. he suggested some private citizens had been unmasked as a part of a surveillance effort. if, in fact, that were true that would be a big deal, wouldn't it? >> well, it all depends, there are perfectly appropriate circumstances to unmask the names of people. in fact, that is done quite often, and the standard is whether the unmasking of those names is necessary to determine the significance of the intelligence. so unmasking is not at all unusual, the question is, was it done appropriately? and here are, is the problem, john, is none of us have seen what the chairman is talking about. this evidence was taken apparently direct he to the white house which creates another issue which of course it is associates involved in the
subject of what we are investigating that is the bigger problem than the chairman's claim. certainly we want to oversee the minimization process and make sure they are operating correctly but w we can't have a credible investigation if one of the members, indeed the chairman takes all of the information he has seen to the white house and doesn't chair it with his own committee. >> dickerson: so he has not shared that with you, including his claim that the president him elf when he was a candidate was1 caught in the surveillance; is that right? >> yes. he hasn't shared with me and to my knowledge, you can check with my colleague mr. gowdy, i don't think he chaired shared it with nick anyone in the committee so we are in the dark on this and i think we suffered two serious blows to the integrity of the investigation this week, one, with that unilateral rip to the white house, but the other with a cancellation of an open hearing that was scheduled for tuesday with directors clapper, brennan and sally yates, the former deputy attorney general. i think her testimony in
of light on the public on the whole michael flynn chapter and perhaps that is something the white house didn't want to see. i can't otherwise account for why we would have this abrupt cancellation of a hearing that both the chair and i had committed to doing. >> dickerson: well, the chairman's argument is the cancellation of that hearing was necessary because he wanted to have other closed door testimony beforehand before having that next hearing. that seems like a reasonable idea. >> , you know, it certainly would be reasonable if that were the justification, but of course the one doesn't preclude the other. we have welcomed the return of any of the witnesses at closed session, but their testimony doesn't necessarily preclude us doing an open hearing that we had already agreed with, the witnesses were prepared to do, they were more than willing to do, so i really don't think that is the justification, indeed we got word they were trying to close the open hearing, even before they suggested an alternate hearing. >> dickerson: you suggested in a tweet that the chairman was trying to, quote, choke off public information, what evidence did you have for that?
hearing that we had on monday where the director of the fbi testified for the first time that there is an ongoing investigation of potential coordination between the trump campaign and the russians as well as the disclosure by the director that there was no factual basis for the president's accusation of wiretapping by his predecessor. i think that hearing went so poorly for the white house that there was a lot of pushback in doing a second open hearing. honestly, john, because the other explanations similar my don't make sense. we could always have directors comey and rogers come back at any time, there is no necessity of having them come back before the open hearing. i think that was merely an effort to camouflage the true object here which was the closure or the cancellation of the hearing with sally yates but let me just make -- yes. >> dickerson: i want to interrupt briefly, congressman, because basically what it sound like you are saying is the chairman of the committee is a
investigating and if you have are saying that how can the committee get its work done is. >> well, look, i think the chairman has to make a decision whether to act as a surrogate of the white house as he did during the campaign in the transition or to lead an i want and credible investigation. i hope he choose it is latter. the country really needs to have an independent, credible investigation in the house. and we had that up until and through monday, where i think that the house process went off the rails was with that a venture by the chairman to the white house. you simply can't run a credible investigation that way. i am going to do everything i can to get this back on track and i implore our chairman and the speaker to rededicate themselves to a serious and bipartisan investigation. we know that russia was involved in hacking our democracy. we know that the evidence or information is sufficient to warrant an fbi investigation of this. we are trying to do as much of this as we can in the public
transparently, obviously some of this will have to be done in closed session but it really demands both parties work together on this. we made every effort to do so but we need the chairmans, chairmen to decide that is whatt his object is as well. >> dickerson: congressman there has been a report from cnn wednesday night that the fbi was looking into collusion with the russians in the trump campaign in terms of spreading information about hillary clinton's campaign. do youave any information to back that up? >> i am not sure that i can comment on that. i can say that i think that the investigation that the director talk about at our monday hearing is justified. i think there is a sufficient basis for that investigation. not only to have been anybody indicated but for it to continue at this point. and i think that we owe it to the country to do this in a yes, ma'am credible way. i will make one final point, john, and that is i do think the events of this week call out the need for an independent commission quite separate and apart from what we do in
congress. there are enough questions that have now been called that have been raised where i think the establishment of that commission would if if the country a lot of confidence that at least one body was doing this in a way that was completely removed from any political considerations. >> dickerson: quickly, congressman, you have said there are circumstantial evidence of this connection and then you said you can't talk about it, isn't that what you are complaining about with the chairman of the committee he says there are things but not showing the evidence? >> no. my complaint with the chairman is taking whatever information he has to the white house when the white house is the subject in a way of the investigation. i wouldn't have any problem with the chairman saying he is concerned about whether minimization procedures are being followed and i don't have a concern with other members characterizing the evidence as they, have and many of them have said they think there is no evidence of collusion. my disagreement with those members is, i don't think that is accurate, and i feel an obligation to say so. >> dickerson: all right, congressman thank you so much for being with us and we will be back in a minute with a member of the republican member of the house intelligen
>> [ ominous music ] [ sniffs ] little girl: daddy! trapped by your unrelenting nasal allergies? [ meow ] [ sneezes ] try clarispray clarispray provides unsurpassed relief. it's 24 hour, non-drowsy and prescription strength. free yourself with clarispray, from the makers of claritin. so find a venus smooth that contours to curves, the smoother the skin, the more comfortable you are in it. flexes for comfort, and has a disposable made for you. skin smoothing venus razors.
>> dickerson:. >> joining us now is south carolina chairman trey gowdy he chaired the chairman on benghazi so he is no stranger into running into partisan politics when he runs an investigation. he joins us from greenville. i want to start with this question of unmasking that chairman nunes brought out, has he shown you any of what caused him to suggest that obama officials are doing surveillance, captured some trump campaign associates and then unmasked them in the process of investigating? >> he has not shown it to me, johns, i am vaguely familiar with it, no more, no less familiar with it than adam schiff is. i will just tell you this. my understand is chairman nunes briefed the commander in chief on matters unrelated to the russian investigation, so if that is big deal in washington, then we have sunk to a new low. >> dickerson: well, i guess congressman schiff would say, but the president is the one
investigation being done by the committee, so the chairman shouldn't be talking to him. >> well, then, let me repeat what i say. that chairman of house intel briefed the chairman in chief that has nothing to do with the russian investigation, so if the commander in chief cannot be briefed by the chairperson of the house intel committee on a matter that has nothing to do with the fbi investigation, then i don't know what they can talk about, john. >> dickerson: all right. so here is -- >> he is the commander in chief. >> dickerson: so if this is an issue outside of the one they are investigating at the moment in the committee and that you are investigating, should it then be taken out of this investigation? have a separate investigation on both the issues that chairman nunes has discovered this week and then also the one you are quite concerned about which is the leaks that have been in the paper, some of them potentially illegal, get that out of this question of russia to keep things from getting mixed the way they appear to have? >> well, they are separate, and i heard my friend from california mention t
independent commission, thank goodness we have one, it is called the fbi, the fbi has counterintelligence jurisdiction and they have criminal jurisdiction, and what we learned on monday, and it is about the only thing we learned on monday was that the fbi's investigating both. they are the world's premiere law enforcement agency, they are independent, you have limited men at the department of justice who have dedicated their careers to the blind pursuit of justice. it doesn't get anymore independent than that. so we have an independent entity investigating counterintelligence and allegations of potential criminality, let congress do its job which is provide oversight over the intelligence community. >> dickerson: do you have any sense of the schedule in which this new information that we have been talking about here, this question of unmasking, when you might have enough information to make a judgment about whether this is, in fact, something that was done improperly or whether as congressman schiff said this is just the normal procedures for going through unmasking? >> it is
bring director comey and rogers back on tuesday. it is incredibly important. adam is right, that adam is right that the incidental collection of u.s. persons happens. what i wish some of my friend over on the other side would be a little more outraged about is the political use of that unmasking, so i understand we collect u.s. citizens but we don't read about those u.s. citizens on the first page of "the new york times" and the "washington post". that admission to threatening the surveillance programs is also a felony. so i hope that we learn more about that on tuesday. all of this is important, john. every bit of it. russia is not our friend. they attacked our democracy. i want to investigate every fact that is related there to, but the felonious dissemination of classified information is the only thing we know for sure is a crime, and it would be nice if we showed the same level of interest in that. >> dickerson: let me ask you, you chaired a committee that got a lot of
papers. what is your sense of the health of this committee? we have seen dueling press conferences. there has been a lot of accusations and passionate aggression here, how healthy is this committee? >> i think it is fine. i actually think chairman nunes and ranking of, are fine and get along fine. i think what you learned on friday, because i heard the witnesses almost 100 times, john, say they could not answer the question in that setting and i want you and your viewers to ask themselves, why are we satisfied with every other facet of culture having serious investigations done confidentially, the grand jury, judges meeting with attorneys, police officers interviewing suspects, all of that is done confidentially, and we are more than satisfied with those investigations, and yet when it comes to congress, we think we ought to have a public hearing, 100 times those two witnesses said they could not answer the question in that setting. why in the hell would we go back to that setting if the
at ansimply type in a namehint. and follow the ancestry leaf far into your family's past. a past filled with stories that intrigue. and inspire. and in doing so, reveal the one unique, improbable, and completely remarkable path that led to you. discover your story. ar stt searching for free now at ancestry.com various: (shouting) heigh! ho! ( ♪ ) it's off to work we go! woman: on the gulf coast, new exxonmobil projects are expected to create over 45,000 jobs. and each job created by the energy industry supports two others in the community. altogether,
e thesare jobs that natural gas is helping make happen, all while reducing america's emissions. energy lives here. >> dickerson: president trump said president obama wiretapped trump tower. this week, the fbi director said there was no evidence of that. this wasn't just a fact check. it highlighted how lightly president trump treats the presidency. we have presidents and we have an office of the presidency. opponents respect the office even if they disagree with the occupant. presidents are criticized but the presidency is behind protective glass. that's why a president can come into office attacking his predecessor's policies but later celebrate the dedication of his predecessor's presidential library. it is why george w. bush prepared a smooth transition for barack obama and why president obama did the same for donald
also gains respect for the presidency because they learn as president trump did this week, that the job is harder than it appeared from the campaign trail. the historical continuity of the presidency is an heirloom and a tool. presidents gain stature by hugging those who came before them. donald trump visited andrew jackson's grave and compared himself to the seventh president who also spooked elites. these perks and protections are why presidents honor the presidency. i shall keep steadily in in view the limitations of my office said andrew jackson, break the limbs and you break the office. nevertheless, president trump compared his predecessor to nixon and mccarthy, called him sick and bad. to break glass like that, a president must have a good reason, and proof. president trump had no evidence and no higher purpose. tending the presidency is important for a disruptive
beat music ] strut past that aisle for the allergy relief that starts working in as little as 30 minutes and contains the best oral decongestant. live claritin clear, with claritin-d. >> dickerson: some of our cbs stations are leaving us now but for most of you we will be right back with a lot more "face the nation", including and interview with former secretary of state george schultz plus our political panel. stay with us. >>
, 18 million americans are already choosing it.... with medicare advantage: a proven public-private partnership, where health outcomes are valued over volume. where early intervention and management of chronic conditions is leading to better outcomes. and costs are more predictable and affordable. why do so many seniors choose medicare advantage? maybe because with age comes wisdom. medicare advantage. leading the way.
welcome back to face nation. i am john dickerson. we sat down with ronald reagan's secretary of state, george shultz last week, he told us that the trump presidency so far has been up and down. among the ups, he praised several of mr. trump's cabinet picks, including secretary of defense james mattis, his colleague at the hoover institution at stanford university, and as for not so up, the early defeat of the president's travel ban. >> what would you say are the down parts of the administration so far? >> well, obviously, when you roll out a big initiative and it blows up, that is a downer. i think it is important for a president to get off to a start where people see, says what he means, means what he says and carry out what he starts to carry out.
your advice to president trump was that he not let the white house dominate anything. what does that mean? >> that has become a tendency to put decision making and even operation malthings in the white house. the white house staff has grown a lot, the nse staff has grown a lot with a result that is a dominant place. so i would hope the president might say something like this. i consider my cabinet and sub cabinet people to be my staff. those are the people i am going to work with to develop policy, and they are the ones who are going to execute it under my supervision. but they are going to execute it. when they do that, you get good people, you get all people who have been confirmed by the senate, and you get better policy and you get better execution. >> dickerson: what are the upsides of having been in business and coming to washington and what are the ways in which
a businessman as president now? >> mr. tillerson called me up. i don't know him. and i said i hear you are being knocked for being a businessman. i said i was a businessman, let me tell you, you have two big advantages, number one, you have known how to run a big organization, so you realize it is not about me, it is about the organization. getting the organization rolling so that it does things. so as head of exxon you didn't want to run a refinery but you wanted to be damned sure you had people in the company who did know how to do it. by the same token in the state department you have people stationed all over the world, so a big part of your job is to see to it that that organization works. and it is not that difficult but you can do it. you know how to do that. and the second thing that happened here as a businessman is you have built places and you have to hire people and
things and get your money out and all kinds of things like that. that is kind of the way the country really works. >> dickerson: but what advice did you give secretary of state tillerson? >> well, i think the secretary of state has to establish two things. one, that he is close to the president and that he speaks for the president, and being close to the president listens to him. so together they formulate the policy. the second thing, of course, is to be clear that he has really got his department working in the way he wants. and he can do that. >> dickerson: let me ask you about honesty in public office. president trump made a claim that his predecessor, president obama wiretapped his trump tower and now the director of the fbi says he has no evidence of that. what cost is that for a
turn out to have evidence behind it? >> well, he those figure out a way -- to get out of it. to say, okay, i made a mistake, and go on from there. because you have got to establish an atmosphere of trust. trust is the coin of the realm. and you need to do that with other leaders, or people you are going to deal with, including your adversaries. when i go back to my days in the marine corps boot camp at the start of world war ii, sergeant handed me my rifle, he says take good care of your rifle, this is your best friend, and i remember one thing, never point this rifle at anybody unless you are willing to pull the trigger. no empty threats. and you extrapolate that and say, mean what you say, and carry out what you say you are going to carry out. then people will trust
and they can deal with you. because they know if you say i will do something, i will do something, you will do what you said you are going to do. if i can't trust you, i can't deal. but if i trust you then i can deal, and so trust is the coin of the realm, very important point. >> dickerson: some people heard president trump's inaugural address and some of the things he said and they feel like his version of nationalism is pulling america back a little from its foreign commitments, he argues, the president does, america has been extended too far overseas and has lost focus on what is happening at home. do you share that view? >> well, you are going to extend yourself too far and we have made some mistakes, but i think that we have a major role in the world. if we are not there, there is no leadership. think about it. at the end of world war ii, some gifted people with names like marshal and truman looked back,
saw the holocaust and saw the great depression. they said to themselves, what a crummy world. and we are part of it whether we like it or not. >> that was the cold war, the doctrine of containment comes forward, nato comes forward. this is all u.s. leadership, but no, ma'am domination. and by the time the cold war was over, i think you could say there was in the world a secure and economic common which everybody benefited. unfortunately, that has fallen apart. in part because we have withdrawn. russia can't take our place. china can't take our place. only the united states can do it, and it doesn't mean you go around telling people what to do. i think to some extent our afghanistan and iraqi experience teaches us something about that. but you go around the world trying to make hive
our advantage. >> dickerson: what do americans allies need to hear right now? >> well, they need to hear that we are in the alliance full bore. and they have been hearing that, i think. >> dickerson: last question. you wrote a book, i believe it was called things on my mind. >> learning from experience. >> dickerson: what else is on your mind these days? >> well, i have five great grandchildren, and i watch them. they don't walk anywhere. they run. they are curious about everything. and they are so much fun, so much life in them. and i look at them and i say to myself, what kind of a world are they going to inherit? is there anything i can do that will make it a little better? so that's my main motivating spirit. >> dickerson: that's great, mr. secretary. thanks so -- thanks for being with us p and we will be right back with our political panel.
>> (baby crying) ♪ minutes old. ♪ a baby's skin is never more delicate. ♪ what do hospitals use to wash and protect it? ♪ johnson's® the number 1 choices in hospitals. [ om[ sniffs ]c ] little girl: daddy! trapped by your unrelenting nasal allergies? [ meow ] [ sneezes ] try clarispray clarispray provides unsurpassed relief. it's 24 hour, non-drowsy and prescription strength. free yourself with clarispray, from the makers of claritin. tais really quite simple.est it comes in the mail, you pull out the tube and you spit in it,
rn girls are taught you're not supposed to do. you seal it and send it back and then you wait for your results. it's that simple. and we are back with our political panel, juliet eilperin is the senior national correspondent for the "washington post", ron brownstein is the editorial director for the atlantic media, where, we are also joined by analyst and slate's chief political correspond dent jamelle bouie and the ben domenech, the publisher of the federalist. jewel jet, i will start with you, what happened with healthcare? >> welshes what you really saw was an extraordinary moment of
gamesmanship where president trump delivered an ultimatum to house republicans, dared them to take a vote and pass the bill that they have been working on for a couple of weeks and at the end of the day, paul ryan, the speaker had to come down and admit that he could not force his members to walk the blank for this proposal, plank with this proposal and acknowledged the affordable care act is the law of the land for the foreseeable future. >> dickerson: what is the 11 for this for republicans. >> a number of lessons. prior to my work with the federalist i worked for 12 years in health policy and in the bush administration during the medicare part d fight and in the senate and saw that play out. there is a major difference between the politics then and the politics now. part d was a popular measure. this measure had 17 percent approval in the most recent poll taken about it. during the part d fight leadership had earmarked they could use to offer different members carrot in order to support the member, keeping the vote openn
three hours. now they don't have that. gop needs to learn the lesson they can take away from this moment which is the freedom caucus and what it represents fiscal conservatives who have support in their districts support that far out pace it is president of the united states are here to stay, and they are a large enough faction to be able to get what they want done. the fact is that today adam sister jerry a representative from illinois said that he thought leadership should take the 11 they should abandon dealing with these conservatives and instead out to centrist democrats which i say it is fun to play pretend, the reality is this fact hundred is not going away and in order to include them in the process, to bring them, not to draft legislation behind closed doors you have to have a more open, a more collaborative process that includes them and other stakeholder groups from the get-go, the real hard problem that leadership has to face that it wasn't just conservatives who killed this bill, it wasn't just the heritage foundation that opposed it but the aarp, every major group. >> hospitals. >> everyone. if you had seven years to put that together, how could you even make that happen? >> it was a pan ramik
because you are talking about first of all it is difficult to think of a another new president who has lost a legislative fight this big this fast in their presidency, it is really hard to -- >> dickerson: people would say clinton, and explain why. >> clinton ultimately passed his budget, he lost healthcare in the second year, ultimately, the end of 1993, 1994 but to me 60 days into your presidency, presidency and have something of this magnitude, the first thing clinton did was difficult but passed it and obama passed the stimulus and george w. bush passed no child left behind tax cut. but to ben's point it was not just the conservatives in the end who bolted in fact as tom cotton noted to you in most of the whip counts there were more people outside of the freedom caucus that opposed the bill than there were inside and to me there is one of the big lessons, all of the tactical problems and i think we should go back to the question if it is possible to work with democrats because the decision not to effect, in effect gave a veto to each fact shun of the republican party but bigger than any of that,
>> right. >> obamacare provided coverage for 20 million people, and the fundamental debate of the division of republican party was conservatives who wanted to take it away from more faster who would not have created anything like an entitlement and those both moderates, centrists and even conservatives who said i have hundreds of thousands of people in my state or district who gained coverage and we cannot simply pull the rug out from under them. >> i think you can't underestimate what the effects of democratic mobilization around had on more moderate republicans, more vulnerable members who are seeing angry people at their town hauls, who are seeing mass protests and decided, you know, i, i risk losing my seat, i risk incurring some sort of political damage by voting for a bill whose headline number, the headline number on this bill was 24 million people would lose their insurance and added to, added to that i think it is important to recognize on top of the strategy mistakes the bill was just a shoddy bill, a bad bill. >> and you can't undereste
negotiation and what that means that yes, you have mobilization on the ground, i was talking to a healthcare lobbyist the other day that says not that they shut their doors and didn't take our calls but didn't solicit our input and more importantly there wasn't a negotiation and so you had no buy in from all of these other agencies. >> right. >> >> dickerson: to an extent there was an negotiation when things were taken out of it to buy off the freedom caucus, you lost -- >> and in the same sense, even those things that were taken out, a lot of it, the real question i had as a health policy person, when i looked at this was not an ideological question i have my own positions when it drops health possibility but workability is it even going to work? in this sense you are asking this past week for all of these members of congress to come out and vote for something they didn't have a final cbo score, they really didn't know how it would apply to their districts and look at the senate schedule going forward, they are going to do montenegro next and gorsuch and going to be a recess and the do a cr and all of those things
flailing for five weeks defending a bill they didn't fully understand. >> we talked about this before what i wrote, the trump -- in january, the core problem here is the basic solution on the private markets, leave aside half 0 the people getting coverage under obamacare were under the expansion of medicaid, but on the private market side the core solution that republicans had was to deregulate insurance in a variety of different ways and the individual mandate ultimately and the essential health benefits and what that does over and over again is advantage younger, healthier and raise costs and diminish access for people, older people with larger health needs and that is their coalition, at this point, the reality is six at this percent of house republicans are in districts that are older than the national average and a majority of donald trump's votes came from white sox over 45, cbo says 25 percent premium increase and suffer much of the coverage loss, they were colliding with their new coalition. you remember in healthcare in the nineties they twice passed a grant for medicaid under clinton without fuss or muss fro
their voters that get hit by that. >> dickerson: the president said he wouldn't support a bill that hurts his own voters but in the horse trading, the tax credit on older people but not get to the problems that you identified, juliet let me ask you about the president as a marketer. we know what the president looks like when he has got something on his mind. >> right. >> dickerson: he is in constant conversation, measure donald trump at 100 percent to the donald trump, president donald trump who worked on this bill. >> right. i mean, this was really, a different person in some ways, partially because he had deep -- this legislation he kept asking his own advisors whether this was a good bill and part of this was, this was not his comfort zone and not an area which he prioritized in his own campaign. aside from saying he wanted to reverse it, and so he did, you know, they can trot out he talked on the phone or in person to 120 members, but he basically was just making these incredibly broad arguments of you need to vote for this and telling you to vote for it, and as a
you didn't have the public communication or even kind of the detailed private communication that is what you need to bring it across. >> to be an effective advocate the president needs to know something about the policy in question and donald trump hasn't shown he has that knowledge, so it made it difficult for him to advocate in public, to advocate to members, and it means that in these negotiations and horse trading, and we have seen reporting to say exactly this, he doesn't really have anything to say or asking. >> the fact is that paul ryan has been working on this for seven years, he was working on it when dolt was still a reality star and should have expected -- >> >> dickerson: i am going to take a quick break there and get back to this dynamic between the president and paul ryan. we will take a short break and be right back. stay with us. >>
bp engineered a fleet of 32 brand new ships with advanced technology, so we can make sure oil and gas get where they need to go safely. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. our first name has always been 'american'. at at&t, we employ more than 200,000 people with good-paying jobs. connecting consumers and budiness through mobile, internet, and entertainment. at&t invests more into america's economy than any other public company. bringing american's more choices, more freedom, and entertainment everywhere. no company is more invested in america's future than at&t. trbreast cancer are helped byof woplanned parenthood.r, jamie: one day, i found a lump on my right breast. solli caed planned parenthood and they got me in that day. within two and half weeks, i had a complete radical mastectomy.
n't mention names, said we're not gonna spend that kind of money on women's health issues. i am. jamie: had planned parenthood not have gotten me that appointment, i probably wouldn't be around. vo: president trump stand with survivors. protect planned parent.hood >> dickerson: and we are back with our panel. ben, pick up where you were. >> so the issue i think that you really have to look at right now is the relationship that donald trump and the white house has with paul ryan. this really was a situation where they outsourced their policy to him, and other republican leaders who had been working on this process for seven years. they could have expected much better, a much better outcome from that leadership, i think, it is not irrational to expect
white house tell me reince priebus who is obviously very close to paul ryan, white house chief of staff is now on extremely shaky ground, that president really doubts him, it was assured by him multiple times through the process things were going well and come out of this with a bill, obviously that didn't work out. and it is really a question of where he stands. >> this whole episodes revealed what a shotgun marriage it is between donald trump's economic nationalism and the small government conservativism or even liberalism that -- ryan, a collision between this bill -- a few weeks earlier in the budget president trump made a big, i will depart from republican thinking and exempt social security and medicare. >> which is paul ryan's piggest crusade on medicare, because those are my voters, because the majority of my votes came from white sox over 45 and we have a lot of, whites. >> over 45 and now i am going to deviate or redirect republican ideology. then you come back a few days
those very same voters that is driven by ryan and it is a a remind never a variety of ways, you are going to see, i think, a consistent collision between the economic nationalism that trump is he embracing which in many countries around the world includes a pretty big government component and the traicial republican drive to shrink government over all other goals. >> about this process, it is true that paul ryan and the house leadership should have had a better sense of how to go forward because they have been working on this for seven years and working in an age where the presidency is pretty involved in policy matters, and a white house has to have politics, which it has to have some sort of knowledge and know how about how to get these things done, the fact of the matter is not only does the white house not have these things, it has a lot of people new, not just to national politics or government but new to just policy-making period, but donald trump imheavily, if you look at his career as a businessman, what he is skilled at is branding. putting his name on a bill that the house produced is 100 percent what you would
am not sure -- i think this may demonstrate that trump himself does not actually have the kind of skills necessary to sheppard these kind of big legislative programs through. >> to give it the special sauce he gave everybody a name during the campaign, he was quite expert at that, make america great again had a pump it to, this never got a name. >> right. >> he didn't want that. and juliet take this from where we are in healthcare and where this goes forward with this idea, couldn't paul ryan say hey if question had the freedom caucus, we knew they would be a challenge, they always have, donald trump could have done rallies in their districts, he could have, instead of giving them an ultimatum at the end could he have started earlier and what does this mean for going forward either with healthcare or tax reform or anything else? >> absolutely, and also interestably the leverage that he wanted -- that he was kind of exercising at the end, this idea that look i am going to put you on the spot, you will take the blame for this going down and i am popular, as ben points out that is not as effective with freedom caucus members in, and those conservatives but also again s
through on that threat. that was his leverage, and instead he wants to blame the democrats and say it is going to explode. >> well, just so there is no question that he could have invested more in his ambivalence hampered it, his unwillingness to license it in the way he has done other things and i think going forward, particularly when you have the ideological cross currents he has to decide what he is going to fully invest in, do that kind of politics, both outside of the beltway where he has enormous scale and figure out how to have enough involvement and enough buy in that he can effectively sell it here. >> ben said earlier it was a fantasy to believe you could bring in some democrats but 111 clearly if you are starting from ththe get-go, assuming you haveo democratic support you are giving a veto to each faction in the republican coalition so it raises the yes, it was never discussed here, not really an option to reach out to democrats, but going forward on tax reform, in particular, where you have this enormous divid
again over this idea of the import adjustment fee and tom cotton you had earlier, a senator from arkansas with wal-mart being against -- that is an idea that is a nonstart never the senate, they are going to be in the same position structurally where each side of the party can veto this unless they can find a way to bring it to democrats. >> which is why i think you have to have a more open process that brings people in beforehand that doesn't just try to legislate on high. the fact is that when you -- we have heard leadership in both houses of congress chain about this new brand of conservativism over the past several years, that these people are not going away. this is the way things are now and you have to recognize that and it is clear now after this experience, donald trump is not going to solve that for you. the people who would be challenging these freedom caucus members in their districts would be challenging them from the right, not from the center, and that is a reality that you have to come to grips with. uh can't just keep playing pretend. >> a more open process just with republicans? >> i think it has to include other pep as well, democrats in districts where donald trump performed well, which includes
>> and that is the kind of people who i think you need to be looking at, going forward who are going to have to run again in a year. whawhat one of the issues, whate the issues the voters care about in their districts. >> dickerson: given where the democratic base is anything you do to work with donald trump is normalizing him. you know the rhetoric from the left. >> i don't think they will want to risk working with the trump administration republicans to advance trump's political interests. my sense is that any democratic that takes a step will immediately face the wrath of much of the democratic base. so in this case, i do think an open process is going to have to be among republicans, and again, i am not sure that the trump white house is really ready to make these kinds of adjustments, they may want to go from an issue that involves six of the, sixth open of an economy that involves the entire economy, and they want to do so like quickly
will be able to make the kinds of on the ground changes they need to make to make it successful. >> dickerson: we will have to leave it there. thanks to all of you for being here. thanks to all of you out there watching us and we will be right back. >> why put up with just part of a day? aleve, live whole not part. tell you what, i'll give it to you for half off. find fast relief behind the counter allergies with nasal congestion?
at music ] strut past that aisle for the allergy relief that starts working in as little as 30 minutes and contains the best oral decongestant. live claritin clear, with claritin-d. to earn a lifetime appointment fto the supreme court. to earn that, president trump's pick neil gorsuwech os us some answers: why did he side with corporations in ninety-one percent of pension cases? why did he make it harder to hold wall street accountable? or for women to get birth control? if gorsuch refuses to say where he stands on critical constitutional issues like your privacy, he doesn't belong on the supreme court. tell senators: no answers, no confirmation.
(nwiping away the appearance of crepey skin. on your arms... (female narrator) on your legs... (male narrator) and even your neck. (female narrator) what would your reaction be? -can i look now? -yes. are you serious? oh my goodness! (female narrator) and now a paid presentation for crepe erase. (male narrator) a breakthrough targeted body treatment brought to you by trusted guthy renker. (female narrator) and featuring emmy award winning actress jane seymour. (male narrator) beloved little house on the prairie actress melissa gilbert. (female narrator) figure skating legend, dorothy hamill. (male narrator) and 12-time olympic medalist dara torres. plus, everyday women whose lives and skin are being transformed with crepe erase. (female #1) i never thought i'd have my mother's skin. i had the turkey neck. and i started purchasing turtle necks. even in the summer. i had crepey skin on my neck,