they like that the president has to rely on congress and congress has to rely on the president. saying i'll take matters in my own hands not to obama's fault or credit, he has that professorial look to say i know what is right, i'll pass it by executive action, it could be bad. >> thank you all. it's great to see you. that brings yo us to the end of this edition of inside story. in washington, i'm ray suarez. >> gang rape, among the most shocking of violent crime is stirring a global outrage. throughout asia, it is believed to be far more common than most people think. >> rape is a major problem in all countries across this region. >> women's experiences of violence are well documented, but the motivations of men have

internally to the congress. but when what you're talking about is the senate's yusuf pro forma sessions in a manner that deprives the president of authority that article ii would otherwise give -- >> that is my basic question really. why is this an important case? i think -- i see what you're saying on this one. that is fine for an answer. thank you. question is isc why is this an important case, in your opinion. nguyen have said because there are thousands of recess appointments. whatave been able to find hundred two. we have had an example of where this court for better or for worse, said that two members of the board is not a quorum and we got some more members, the debt with the problem. they ratified all those opinions to my they get with it. it did not take them too much time. we have different political parties taking absolutely opposite sides, it seems to me, or some members thereof, depending on the political party of the president. and we have a clause that had to do with the constitution and the probl

the fault is with the folks in congress. and i think harry reid has tried to move forward bipartisan legislation, and in some places been successful like immigration reform, but i think it is on congress. it is moving forward. >> many instances have given him the authority to act beyond what the text requires, so i think it is -- >> you are rejecting is suggest -- that if he has used his personal power, twisted more arms gone to the hill more often, hosted members at the white house more often, more couldn't have gotten done. >> in recent months but you know, i think that the issue. >> i think in the meantime, the president is strategically focusing on things, he believes he has the best chancing of moving forward, things like immigration reform, i hope minimum wage can be another. we think it is very good evidence that it would help jump start our economy, in a way with that's absolutely necessary. i think that's what the american people want to see from the congress, i think the if the will prioritize trying to move those

despite my hidden rage at the congress or seething at the congress, the fact is i was able to cut nearly three dozen major procurement programs that i considered wasteful or unnecessary, cut $180 billion out of overhead over a ten year period and get congressional support to do all of those things, when most of my predecessors were lucky if they got two or three or four programs cut, and it was because of the way i worked with the congress and what i say in there is you can make this work, even in today's environment in washington, you can be successful in leading change. >> rose: there is finally this. even though you have made a joke about how you received your neck injury, when you ventured to consider going back to washington in the end you are going back to washington when you die you have asked to have your final resting place at arlington national cemetery among the men and women. >> >>> our rating service provides independent objective ratings daily on over 4300 stocks. learn more at the street.com/nvr. >>> rebound. stocks snapped back from yesterday

this has been the practice within the congress and without addressing others. this has been always the decision made by the party. >> accepting the initiative proposed by others, the absence of confidence in our political proceedings is attributed to individual reasons. and lack of the desire to take part in the process as a tactual move. however -- tactical move. however, the national congress believes that more arrangements, more arrangements and more reform are required for the political process to the better. this also applies to the constitution, and the other political measures whereby the transparency, democratic and integrity of the competition is guaranteed. without any recession, should believe that we have the final say. this will be judged by all of us and by others. we should act in genuine intention, and all the sudanese should take part with goodwill and genuine intention. the call is meant for them to take part and contribute. the freedom of political process is not limited only to election. yet it is the most ma mast manit of it. >> you've been

the congress is very friendly to the military. sometimes we make decisions that upon a second look maybe were not that smart. the fact that we are responding appropriately i think is a good thing. but do not underestimate our urging helps. now is there a social contract even though it's not in writing if your kids, sons and daughters will not have to be drafted because others would have to come forward and do the job done voluntarily isn't that the deal? and i don't know what that's worth to somebody out there knowing your son or daughter doesn't have to be drafted. think about it in terms of the budget. well would you pay if you have to avoid your family from being drafted. when we talk about the retirement your master sergeant, is that right what was your retirement? >> 21,000 a year. >> 21,000 after 20 years of service and multiple deployments whatever risks come your way, that is a good retirement but by no means an exorbitant retirement given the value to the country. would you be willing to pay somebody $21,000 or contribute

congress did pass the pay act. in that pay act, on this happen part, which i think is the strongest -- very strong for your side, but it defines the vacancy in terms of 30 days prior to their recess. that would take care of most of these. you see, if vacancy could be defined as something that stretches, because congress is it stretches in terms of pay for 30 days. i would love to know what the sg thinks of it. >> a couple of different responses. first, the third question calls into question no's -- no past recess appointees, the third question. >> putting your mind what would've happened in 1830 f -- if somebody, when they had a nine- month recess, close to 10 months, someone had the bright idea, well, you live near washington. show up at wherever we are holding our session and set for five minutes and will stop president andrew jackson for making recess appointments. what would be staying? >> your first question first. the pay act of 1940 clearly repudiates the -- it ties it to the -- most appointees cannot get pa

and they also don't want -- of the congress won't help, of the congress will participate, for the president to just sit there will the kutcher does not make the progress the people milanese. >> where do you see common ground between the democrats and republicans in the house? >> i think there is common ground in that everybody says they want to grow the economy. the president said he wanted to see taxes reduced on businesses that were doing in going jobs here in america. and did not want to the advantage those who were taking jobs overseas and what a to make sure that people could bring profits home. so from that standpoint i think we can reach common ground. think we ought to be able to reach common ground and cumbria's of immigration reform. 70 percent of the american people think that makes sense. the chamber of commerce this that makes sense. the afl-cio optics that makes sense. for motorists think it makes sense. farmworkers think it makes sense. angelico's think it makes sense. certainly the congress of the united states ought to agree with the overwhelming majority of the american pe

it requires the executive branch to consult with the congress and it gives congress the final say on any trade agreement in the form of an up and down vote. bipartisan legislation has been written and will be introduced very soon. we're going to do all we can to make the case for its approval. what new opportunities will tpa create for us? the first is the transpacific partnership. we are within striking distance of concluding an agreement that is critical to america's economic and strategic leadership in the world and in the world's fastest growing region. but we must have a high quality agreement that opens markets for manufacturers, farmers and service providers, and forces the digital and creative economies and tpp must include strong intellectual property protections in order to earn our unqualified support and that of the congress. the chamber will also lead the business community's efforts in support of a trans -- transatlantic trade and investment partnership that will be with the eu, and remember i said they need economic stimulus in a big way. we're also working on a trade

certainly congress is the legislative ranch of the government. they are not passing legislation, generally things are not very productive. individual members of congress, -- there iss idea 535 individual members of congress who come to washington because they have things they want to get done. him they have ideas about legislation they would like to pass. they are working through these ideas. they're sometimes getting hearings on these bills. congress is not passing legislation as an institution. a1t: they will be in session -- in session 114 days this year. that is pretty low pre--- pretty low. so much of what comes to the floor is driven by the leaders. in --aders and others not not a ton of stuff that has consensus that republicans want to pass beckham passed through the senate. pass through the senate. campaigning has come to dominate modern congress. when they are not in washington there in the districts to a meeting greets. -- districts doing meet and greets. when you look at what they are inches and what the topics are, the bills happened

i think that angst and discussed about the way congress operates -- and disgust about the way congress operates is common. i can understand that feeling. ask lobbyistsyou or business groups, a lot of people on k street did not want the government to shut down -- i would say almost all of them did not want the government to shut down. --did not and it was a smart they did not think it was the smart move. when you ask lawmakers why it happened, a lot of people said voters were upset. people in my district, constituents did not want the affordable care act to happen. the shutdown was part of this strategy to try to make that happen. it didn't work. the affordable care act is going forward. essentially, i think that was the response to constituents and voters and something that really wasn't responsive to k street. you can see -- even now in 2013, congress, washington was responsive to voters. host: kevin bogardus is with "the hill" newspaper. you can see his work at thehill.com or follow him on twitter. thanks for joining us today. that will do it for today on the "washington journal." se

is the president trampling all over congress? >> brianna, he's doing what presidents have done before him, including republican presidents, like ronald reagan, who did more executive orders than the president has done to this date. so look, presidents have the power to use executive action. he can't legislate immigration reform through an executive ord order, for example. but he can change some regulations. so what he's saying is, i'm going to go down that track, and i'm going to try and do what i can do, but i'm also going to try and get some things done in the congress. and, you know, i think he's playing an outside game, but then he's got to try and figure out how to play an inside game to get a few things done. so it's a very difficult needle to thread here, brianna. >> that's right. because he is going to say tonight, there are some things, perhaps immigration he wants to work through congress on. but let's talk about the thing we're going to hear over and over. opportunity, opportunity tonight. he'll be talking about the mi

and even my anger at the congress, the reality is i got a lot of things done with the congress. most of my predecessors, it you are lucky, could get two or three or four big military procurement programs canceled that were over cost, overdue are no longer relevant. i cut nearly three dozen and ended up getting congressional approval or acquiescence in all of them. i cut almost 200 lien dollars out of the pentagon's overhead, and even eliminated a combatant command. i got the congress to support me on that. partly it was because i had an enormously strong supporter president obama and a veto threat behind me but it was also working across the aisle with members of congress of both parties and figuring out how to move the agenda forward. and so i argue at the end of the book that you know we do have these institutional problems such as gerrymandering, what i consider the weakening of the role of congress in governance because of the weakening of the committee chairs and a variety of other things. but at the end of the day, the problem you can begin to i think address the paralysis

where does it leave congress and the fcc moving forward? >> well, i think that the district or the circuit court's decision is, first of all, a landmark decision, a very, very important one for the american people. i would say that they ruled in favor of what has always been at the heart of telecommunications law in our country, dating back to the early 30s when the fcc was actually the federal communications commission was established, and that is to the public good, to serve the public. and in this decision, which was -- it was a lawsuit that was brought by verizon. verizon did not want the fcc -- they were challenging that the fcc have any authority whatsoever to regulate in this in this square, so to speak. and they lost. the court said that the fcc clearly has the authority to country. so that's a very, very, very important decision. and i think a victory. now, what was very interesting, also, was to read what the court said in terms of why it threw out two parts of the challenge from the fcc. and it was really because of how they coup

the collection program comes under reauthorization by the congress. these reforms will require action from congress. >> the proposals i'm disclosing today should give the american people that their rights are being protected. i recognize that there are additional issues that require for further debate. on all of these issues, i'm open to working with congress to mange sure we build a broad consensus on how we move forward. >> for more on this issue, let's bring in charlie wrangle. >> let's get to work, ed. >> this whole hurdle i believe is our laws keeping up with technology. and i think the president really explained that today. but how do we do it? >> educate the people of how important it is for us to really be able to get intelligence. you know, i saw 9/11. i've been in combat. so i'd like to yield to those people who can provide the information that causes americans to live. but between you and me, ed, when i saw this snowden information, i was so embarrassed as an american that people would think our country was the type -- when we went overseas

without counting on congress. >> so, he doesn't want to count on the congress. what will lawmakers have to say about that once the speech has been given? we're going to have a conversation at 6:15 live right here at the capital. the russell building with susan davis who has ideas about what we can expect to hear from the president and what congress members may say about what he has to say. in the meantime, i'm going to throw it back to you in the studio. >> thank you very much. just reminding everybody that they can watch the state of the union right here on wusa9. with derek and jan. >>> it's been part of the blight as you enter the district from the east. you can't miss the abandoned hexed apartment store warehouse on new york avenue in northeast. plan to develop the site was unveiled today. bruce johnson reports, most of the major candidates for d.c. mayor were there. >> build it, they will come. and i builng it and they will be coming here. >> long time developer, today, he unveiled plans to restore the old hex warehouse with a new grocery store, retail, res

ffect on the date congress specified. a lot of people, in looking at branch actions say it is contrary to the law doubt but they would somebody would have standing to bring a challenge to those executive actions. the executive here to essentially eliminate an law congress thought was important namely that members of congress and toir staffs would be subject the same healthcare system with the imitations as constituents, that provision has gh this opm resume likewise been relaxed. what we think makes this think nt and what we gives somebody -- and senator johnson and his staff members in articular -- standing to raise an objection is this doesn't just affect everybody in the is not an abstract concern. this is a provision that senatorally affects how office get their healthcare. it affects how the senator khrfs employees -- classifies within his office for purposes of their eligibility. challenge a classic to a statute that is a that lized grievance affects everyone this is a challenge to the implementation f a statute tha

internally to the congress. but when what you're talking about is the senate's use of pro forma sessions in a manner that deprives the president of authority that article ii would otherwise give -- >> that is my basic question really. why is this an important case? i think -- i see what you're saying on this one. that is fine for an answer. thank you. >> what my basic question is is why is this an important case, in your opinion. you have said because there are thousands of recess appointments. you have been able to find what 102. we have had an example of where this court for better or for worse, said that two members of the board is not a quorum and we got some more members, the debt with the problem. they ratified all those opinions to my they get with it. it did not take them too much time. we have different political parties taking absolutely opposite sides, it seems to me, or some members thereof, depending on the political party of the president. and we have a clause that had to do with the constitution a

congress is split on the issue. the intelligence committee i think it's fair to say are generally comfortable. say that pass laws to make, you know, codify and strengthen civil liberty protection and increase the transparency. not change it in the house and senate. republican and democrats in the judiciary committee are in a different place. the congress is split i think on these two. president obama said he was flying to make change. he didn't specify what they were. the group in the white house is work on what the changes might be. >> do you have any sense -- i think it's an open question as to what the review group recommend and whether president obama will -- >> do you agree with them? >> it's made up a variety individuals. i think the two most recognizable figures was michael deputy cia director. >> who now works for you. >> for my -- and richard the counterterrorism adviser for bush. they along with others are charged reviewing the question how do we reck size the tension between security and privacy and civil

the same effect on members of congress as the full moon does on werewolves. [ laughter ] >> jon: the bureaucracy of it, strategy of it all that stuff is fascinating but on a global picture, the idea of -- you know, you see what is going on in iran right now. it's deteriorated once again to terrible violence, afghanistan as well. ask -- does it point to an idea that maybe america fell too in love with a mar shal plan and that strategy is doomed to failure to some extent? >> one of the points i make in the book is that in recent decades, i believe presidents when confronted with a foreign challenge or a foreign problem, have been too quick to reach for a gun to solve it. i said in another book i wrote 15 years ago that the dirty little secret in washington is that the biggest doves wear uniforms because they've seen war and the consequences and they've been sent into battle, sent into conflict and seen political support evaporate because of political leadership, the lack of plymouth call leadership or whatever. one of the themes is that we need be a lot more care whfl we use military f

the president gives to congress the state of the union. the white house has been working on and has gone through a number of drafts, including last-minute edits. there told his remarks before the joint session of congress will last about an hour. the theme is "opportunities for all." he will travel a short 16 blocks to capitol hill. , wescene inside the capital will set the stage as members of congress, the president's cabinet, and justices gather. of course, we want to hear from you as part of our state of the unit coverage with your calls, comments, and tweets. >what issues do want the president and congress to address this year? we have john lovett. he was a former speech writer for president barack obama. thank you for being with us. >> good to be here good as you put together -- good to be here. t> as you put together -- put i in the president's voice. when ie was a meeting was there with the chief staff writer and communications advisers. it is a pretty big and open meeting. it is the job about white house speech writer to turn those

the committee reviewed and endorsed plans for the report due to congress in march of 2014. it used a random design to assess to program and the home visit program. i hope this can give you an idea of the ongoing efforts to learn and improve. >> we will begin questions and i recognize myself five minutes for that purpose. glenn hackbarth, i believe we need to consider the policies carefully. many people are advocating for make the extenders permanent. you laid out a set of criteria to use when considering the extenders. using your criteria, did you believe all or the majority were not extension? >> not all. we think many shouldn't be extended. >> in your opinion, based on your criteria, do you have a couple programs that congress needs to look at with a critical eye as we begin the review? >> let me focus on the rural payment provisions some of which are permanent and some are temporary and under consideration here. as i said in the opening comments, we did an extensive review of medicare rural health issues published in june of 2012, i believe. and part of that was to exami

to congress to change the law of the land. they should not change it by presidential decree or brings ital -- that to the second part of the reason that i am bringing this lawsuit. it is to uphold the rule of law. i think that this lawsuit will hopefully provide a very long overdue check on presidential power. expanding presidential power. particularly in this administration. we are seeing and i think we will continue to seek, a real abuse of executive authority by this president. that is one of the primary issues and one of the primary reasons i am bringing this lawsuit. we have certainly seen it. it affects the united states senate through the national labor relations appointments. that was one instance where we were able to make this brief. one of the reasons i am filing this lawsuit is because, in general, numbers of congress do not have or cannot establish legal standing to bring a lawsuit. i truly believe that this is one of those cases and we will have mr. clement talk about that, where we do have standing. i do believe

on the list of congress enumerated powers were. recognizing this problem, the federal government and other defenders of the mandate had what i call healthcare special argument. this is a special market that is different than anything else. in the book we go through all these and i will mention the one that was most often the health care that was said unlike most other products everybody must purchase it at some point in their lives. to some extent, this is true. but what is the focus has shifted from health insurance, which is what you are actually required to purchase two health care which is just a broad category. by the same kind of to which i could also be justified broccoli mandate. not everybody likes to rock the as much as i do. many people do not purchase it but need broad market for food, which brusquely is just one part. it even more difficult to avoid in the market for health care that has tried avoiding if and i can make a similar analysis for any other product. mabey unlike all of us you don't read the conspiracy, that

the president to act like he knows that congress is do it . welcome to tonight's special state of the union politics panel joining me marc harrold libertarian commentator attorney and author of team o'mara president of the young democrats of america and newsome national advisory council with the project twenty one black leadership network thanks for all all of you for joining us but it's great to have you with us. shouldn't we just as a starting point shouldn't we really be talking about congress's failures not president obama is i mean they've been. from from two thousand from january twentieth two thousand and nine the night that obama was inaugurated and fifteen republicans and newt gingrich and frank luntz got together at the caucus room restaurant and basically swore a blood oath to do everything they could to block any any success on his part i mean the agenda that the republicans have always had is ruin the economy to prevent him from having any success and then blame him for all of it and the american people i mean you know this is the

also the congress and the senate, u.s. house and u.s. senate, to talk about what we're doing in our state. governor hickenlooper and i gave several examples. one is the states came together with the nga to hold 52 different meetings related to health care costs, health care systems, lowering medicaid cost, making our systems work, better quality of care. and our states, we've also talked as he mentioned about substance abuse in our nation, some of the issues that the governors have taken. governor hickenlooper and i have worked with other states talking about energy policy. and that we believe america has great resources so we can have energy independence and more economic security for our nation. so we led an effort and encouraging our federal governors to look at vehicles to save taxpayer money and utilize a natural resource abundant in our nation. >> i think it's safe to say the president committed himself to support every priority of the nga. no, i'm just kidding. [laughter] i do think it's fair to say that both presid

how the president of the united states interacted with the congress. he had this crazy believe the executive and legislative branch should cooperate. and i mean that quite literally. he meant the two branches should co-operate the government. and that meant, he thought, that the whitehouse, the presidency must be personalized and humanized. it meant he should make appearances not just in public but in the congress. and so wilson did something extraordinary that members of his own party resisted and that was he began showing up. he realized that a president had basically not set foot in the congress since adams left in 1801. no one, now we have this great institution of the state of the union address, that didn't exist for 112 years. until woodrow wilson decided i will come forth and i will present the state of the union and what i foresee the state of the union. he did that every year so it became a washington institution. he thought in order to pass and emphasis its importance, i want to say to the congress how important it is and i will do it my voti

the idea of the congress not acting really does offend me because the purpose of the sanctions is to deter them falling apart at a time we still need them. sanctions is to determ falling apart at a time we still need them. the number of countries sending delegations to iran is growing by the day. beginning to fall apart. if congress voted to pass new sanctions that could only be imposed if this agreement fell apart, it would reinforce to the western world, stop doing business with iran. michael singh, the politics behind all this, what's going on? guest: to the extent we have made progress on iran that led , ithe stage we're at now was as a result of cooperation between congress and the president, perhaps unspoken cooperation. it was that combination of very tough sanctions as well as this diplomacy which has taken place as well as other factors that led to the place we're at now. the disagreement that you hear is really about the end state, what sort of final agreement would be acceptable, where am,uld we leave iran's progr to what extent can we get more from iran that we have gotte

the clerk: to the congress of the united states, i am pleased to transmit to the congress, pursuant to sections 123-b and 123-d of the atomic energy act of 1954, as amended, the act, the text of a proposed agreement between cooperation between the american institute in taiwan, a.i.t., and the taipei economic and cultural representative office in the united states, tecro, concerning peaceful uses of nuclear energy. the agreement, i am also pleased to transmit my written approval, authorization and determination concerning the agreement and an unclassified nuclear proliferation assessment statement, npas, concerning the agreement. in accordance with sections 123 of the act, as amended by title 12 of the foreign affairs reform and restructuring act of 1998, public law 105-277, a classified annex to the npas prepared by the secretary of state in consultation with the director of national intelligence summarizing relevant classified information, will be submitted to the congress separately. the joint memorandum submitted to me by the secretaries of state and energy and a letter from the cha

-- congresses that worked better than the current congress does. the care and feeding of the fisa regime which has gone through a great many rewrites over a long period of time, current following changes so quickly, it actually requires regular revisiting not just for the oversight reasons, that you the be, but also because technology changes and it bhoims out of date. the point bruce made about congress is, it is -- it can be devastating. it becomes harder and harder to reach a point where the congress with work in a bipartisan fashion, and this legislation always has to be bipartisan on a technically dense area of enormous legal complexity. when you create these oversight issues that the executive has to a work with, it creates huge burden, and it is actually an enormous problem. caps cans captioned by the national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org-- [captions copyright national cable satellite corp 2014] >> the situation doesn't bother me, access bothers me. i had access to the information before. d.n.a. felt that the ow is from booz allen.

from the congress. the congress were stripped of executive function, executive responsibilities, the head title. executive powers were transferred through what came to the article 2, a president a single individual achieved executive, chief administrator, commander in chief. congress was left with fulsome legislative powers enumerated as they were. of course one president, one individual can't do the job of executing the law in 1789. so the debate continued. the president needed help obviously. who would higher the help? who would hire the help? who would hire the principal high-level officers under the president to execute the law. who would hire the folks to fill the benches that would be created under this new constitution? going into the convention many folks went in with the assumption that congress would continue to do that job and appoint the officials and new judges? that is the interesting thing about our founding debate and discussion matter. in philadelphia, in the summer of 1787 this was deb

of the congress and the congress' level of expectation of him i think are considerably lower than they were a year ago. >> woodruff: other than immigration, david, where are the areas you see the potential for real working together, cooperation. >> other than immigration? i don't see any. this has been a problem with the obama administration-- maybe an insoluble one, but i think it was soluble. there were a core of tea party people who were not going to cooperate with anything. i think at some point in the administration it would have been possible to build a governing majority center right and sort of try to isolate the tea party people and get the other republicans into son-in-law sort of governing coalition. they never quite could do that therefore we're stuck with the polarization we have now and it's unlikely we'll see big legislation any time in the next few years. >> ifill: who does the president speak to in a night like tonight? is he just talking to himself? is he talking to his supporters in the american people who might be watching something else on d.v.r.? >> this is the bi

toward the congress. america has gone through this kind of political rebalancing before and much of the time we've gotten it wrong. that's how we got isolationism and disarmament after world war i. that's how we got a hollow army after vietnam. and that's how we weakened our national security after the cold war, in the misplaced hope of cashing in on a peace dividend. we can't afford to repeat these mistakes. a new war powers resolution, one that is recognized as both constitutional and workable in practice, can be an important contribution to this effort. it can more effectively invest in the congress the critical decisions that impact our national security. it can help build a more durable consensus in favor of the kinds of policies we need to sustain our global leadership and protect our nation. in short, the legislation we are introducing today can restore a better balance to the way national security decision making should work in a great democracy such as ours. let me say again, neither the senator

the republican response. and the issues shaping the battle for congress. his vision, their challenge, your future. the 2014 campaign is under way right now. >> we can say with renewed confidence that the state of our union is strong. >>> it is almost that time on capitol hill. president obama will take center stage surrounded by his strongest allies and toughest critics. i'm anderson cooper in washington. we are now about an hour away from the president's big entrance for his state-of-the-union address. he'll leave the white house very soon, head to the capitol where many of the nation's most powerful people are arriving right now. it is a rare moment when washington comes together. the president may invite a bit of confrontation with republicans tonight just months before the critical mid-term election. let's bring in wolf blitzer with more. >> we're told the president will threaten to use his executive powers more often when he feels blocked by republicans in congress. he'll also make a new push to close the income gap of the country. look for the republ

jack lew, the secretary treasury, urging congress not to hold the economy hostage. susan collins and mark t the rier, republicans and democrats pair off for this as a show of bipartisanship that lasts exactly an hour, the length of the speech, most speeches most years. >> the cabinet enters on their order of succession. i believe we caught a glimpse of elliot engel at the end of the road there. he has his seat. >> i have to say that we are seeing some new faces. there are new members of the president's cabinet, we are seeing new faces, maybe their first ones, i think sally jewel. >> yes, exactly. >> perez behind the secretary of labor there. >> in some ways, this is a new team coming in this year. >> and that's natural for a second term. had strong relationship with the president, that sends a good shall, i think. >> one has been the focus of the ire of the republican party has been kathleen sebelius of health and human services. what has been the problem, the most difficult problem the president has had to deal with the last year. >> i think in many ways, it has, b

power article one section eight of the constitution gives to the united states congress the congress the clues of authority over our trade deals the authority of the commerce among nations and what the fast track bill would do and grandfathering in the t.t.p. would give to the executive branch of the u.s. t.r. into the administration the exclusive power to choose the partners trading partners write the contents control the content of the trade deals and then write implementing legislation that would then be treated in the house on an up or down vote no amendments limited debate just what i call it a kind of a legislative laxative that's bad for the constitution and it is a double entendre anyway. and we're opposed to it and today was actually a national day of action the teamsters and other groups all across the civil society different constituencies fighting fastrack it doesn't have an original co-sponsor in the house democratic and frankly it doesn't deserve one so it's in for a big fight and i encourage your viewers to get involved to go to a stop fast track dot com or go to dot o

the heck with congress. yet the load of some of the other stuff on the hearings. this minimum-wage thing could be opening up salvo. many say the big i will dig it is way on many issues from environmental regulations to financial regulations and all of the regulations that republicans hate. he said because he simply can't work with them. so he is going to plow forward with or without them. ron pal says wait a minute. but first come into our very own judgenapolitano. not only are human with the territory, but impeachable territory as well. so what is the exeutive order in and being out of order? >> for those of us that believe that the constitution means what it says, there's a lot of legislation against presidents, not only president obama, but predecessors a lot of leeway to wiggle with the law and enact regulations and who intereted in ways that they want. but this president has begun to do things that has the effect of rewriting the law and that is when he gets into a dangerous territory. the president sig

they've watched the u.s. congress. they know how many intensity there is behind the idea of adding more sanctions. a final thought -- more sanctions will in part have the effect of enfranchising, just as they did in iraq, the most corrupt people who control levers of illegal business and we have to remember that. that much more aggressive sanctions that follow breakdown of negotiations will empower the people we would least like to see on top. >> robin, your thoughts both to the question but also on this question, this issue of sanctions and like to keep it focused on tehran, but as the congressman has already indicated, it leads into washington politics as well. on the sanctions question, what was your observance there? >> one of the important things we have to understand is that there are sanctions imposed for a lot of different reasons and they're not all related to the nuclear program. support of -- support of extremist groups, a state sponsoring of terror. there are multiple issues and the iranians are looking in

and report that to the congress every year. but more more than 100 years, that was a written appraisal that was read by a clerk to the chamber. it was woodrow wilson in 1913 who came to the white house -- came to the capitol to make the address in person and ever since then almost all of them have been made in person by the president. lyndon johnson was the first one to use prime time television to make the address and, of course, now that's the way it is always done because often the president really isn't speaking to the congress so much as speaking past the congress and talking to the american people. and i believe that's what we're going to be hearing tonight as well, bob. >> i think one thing we are not going to see this year is the shutdown of the federal government. every republican that i've talked to said, you know, john boehner was talking today about how, you know, he felt in the beginning it would never work but his members wanted to do it and so he let it. but i think republicans feel like they learned a lesson in

i think the congress is going to have to pick it up. i hope they will expand it to look also at privacy as it relates to giant corporations. i frankly feel that i'm in at least as grave a threat of having my privacy invaded by a number of corporations as i am by the government. i think it's an important topic. i think we have two really great guests tonight. in crossfire, laura from the alcu and tom ridge. i find a very complicated situation we're in. and i don't know if you'll agree with this analysis, but i think we live in a time, as the boston bombing reminded us, where we have people who genuinely hate us and we have people around the world who would like to destroy us. and there's a growing danger that sooner or later they're going to get nuclear weapons. and you can deliver a nuclear weapon in a truck actually ea easier than you can fit it on a missile. i think there's a genuine danger that some day we could lose cincinnati -- i'm picking that at random. that's a bigger danger to me than the risk of the current government doing s