White House Defends Decision on Transgender Protections CSPAN February 23, 2017 2:58pm-3:56pm EST
to continue the administration's effort to engage to create jobs and opportunities for america's workers. the 24th deal spent the morning and working sessions with the vice president, cabinet members and das and came together with the president to brief them on their discussions and recommendations. the group discussed the need to rollback burdensome regulations cycling cannot growth. the co bank for actions he's already taken, expressed the issues and the president pledged to do more through executive branch and by working with congress to pass legislation that will help further economic growth and job creation. this leader recommended the administration take a multifaceted approach to the next eight policies including tax reform for which secretary nguyen said the progress was continuing to be
made. the president has committed to lowering taxes, level the playing field with other countries when it comes to trade and taxation. the group held a lengthy discussion about the need to invest in the american worker and prepare for the manufacturing jobs of the future, especially the key role of vocational schools training to work for member of the 21st century. the ceo and administration of certain officials agreed that public-private partnership will be the cornerstone of a robust plan to rebuild the crumbling infrastructure. the president is committed to streamlining and permitting process that is holding back so many key projects. at the end of the discussion, the group expressed their excitement for having a economic growth in the white house and the ceo of dow chemical even said this is the most pro-business administration since the founding fathers. the president conveyed his attention to assemble the leaders on a regular basis to discuss progress for these important goals.
the call that the participants is available. this afternoon the president spoke with canadian prime minister trudeau by phone. i will have a readout on that call soon. right now, the president is involved in another listening session with those in a fight against domestic and international trafficking including representatives from international justice mission and united way. their expertise will be invaluable to the president as he engages members of congress to raise awareness about and push through legislation aimed at preventing all forms of the horrific and unacceptable practices of the buying of human lives. human trafficking is a dire problem both domestically and internationally. through solving the second epidemic is a huge priority. dedicated men and women from across the government have spoken on this for some time and the president is committed to continue working with these organizations and departments. the participant list for this session is also going to be available. the president this evening will attend a dinner with the business council. secretaries tillerson and
kelly had meetings with officials from the mexican government. they were forward looking meetings focused on finding common ground ways to advance both our countries security and economic well-being. side headache candid discussions on the discussions and opportunities as part of the us-mexico relationship. the conversation called covered a range of bilateral issues including energy, migration, security, education and people to people ties. the parties also reiterated our commitment to law and order at our border by stopping potential terrorists, dismantling the transnational criminal network that are moving drugs and people into the united states. under this president there is no mistaking the rule of law matters along both sides of our border. both secretary tillerson and the secretary kelly our meeting with president nieto in a continuation of the productive dialogue that is sending that our two countries pathway to greater security and long-term prosperity. looking ahead to our upcoming
schedule, tomorrow the president will welcome president peru for a work visit. he is in town for a separate visit and requested to meet with the president. there will be a spray on the top of that, further guidance later today. the president will speak at cpac tomorrow. the president is looking forward to addressing this group of conservatives committed individuals. our nation's governors are starting to gather in washington for a meeting of the national governors association. the president and first lady will welcome them sunday evening. the vice president and members of the cabinet will be in attendance. while the governors are and how they will meet with members of the cabinet, white house and other secretaries including kelly price and secretary child's. the president, vice president and senior white house staff will participate in a portion of the business session of an g-8 winter meeting that takes place monday morning. next week of course the president will give a joint session to address both
houses of congress. he's working closely to present his visionto congress and the american people . a few updates that i wanted to share now that we are a few days out. the scene of the address will be the renewal of the american.. the address will focus on public safety including defense, increase border security, taking care of our veterans and then economic opportunity including education, job training, healthcare reform, jobs and regulatory reform. with that, i'd like to take a few of your questions. >> the white house said that travel ban was quickly out of necessity for national security. now we are hearing there's these repeated delays while the new one is being crafted. how do we reconcile those two talking points. and then secondly, the president said that the deportation is taking place under these watches are a military operation. terry kelly had this provision.
>> out take the latter first. the president was using that as an adjective. it's happening with precision. and in a matter which is being done clearly. i think we made it clear in the past with secretary tillerson reiterated what kind of operation the president was clearly disguising the manner in which this was being done. so just to be clear, on his use of that phrase. i think the way it's being done by all accounts is being done with very much a high degree of precision and in a flawless manner in terms of making sure the orders are carried out and streamlined in an efficient manner. the first part was? >> the travel ban.>> look,
we've made it very clear that we believe the first one was done in a compliance with the us code and the authority granted to the president. this time the order is finalized, what we're doing is in the implementation phase of working with the respective departments and agencies to make sure when we asked you this, it's done in a manner that is flawless. not a question of delaying, it's a matter of getting it right. getting the courts opinion and concerns in its consideration but the order is finalized. it's now awaiting implementation. what we want to do is make sure we are working through the departments and agencies so that any concerns or questions are entered on the front end but we are acting with the appropriate haste and diligence to make sure the order is done in an appropriate manner. >> . [inaudible] he was asked if we should assume that the plans that go out, will take it back to 2018. he said and we quoted, i think we are looking at that. with the president except a tax proposal that deals with a timeline of limitations through 2018? and if not, what's that? >> he sounded emotional and
clear that this goal would be wrapped up by august and implemented. the question is, what you are referring to is what year it takes place ?whether it's retroactive to 2017 or fiscal year 17. i think at the details get ... we will have more details on that as it moves forward. calendar year 2017 and distal year 2017. obviously tax year, excuse me, calendar year 2017 they are most concerned with and the president as we work through congress will have those details to be able to flesh out. i want to go to our first of the day and yield to connecticut media group. >> good afternoon sean, thanks for taking my question, i appreciate it. connecticut's governor directed police chiefs across the state wednesday to avoid taking any special action against undocumented immigrants including honoring immigration detainer request from ice. what will the repercussions be for this state in terms of federal funding it receives from the trunk administration and secondly, does the
president's executive order on sanctuary cities apply to those that are on declared sanctuary cities?>> i think there's a couple things. the idea that governor malloy would not want the law followed as enacted by congress or the connecticut legislature in any fashion seems to be concerning. right? whether you are a governor or the mayor or the president, laws are passed in this country and we expect lawmakers and are lawmaking agencies to follow and a here to the laws passed by the appropriate level of government. it's concerning and it's troubling that that is what he would tend to his people and other governors because we are a nation of laws and i think he will need to understand with her it's the law he passes to the governor of connecticut or the laws that are passed and signed by the president, there's a reason that democracy works,
because the people need a representative at level every level to pass the law in that particular branch of government signs or vetoes it , and we live by those rules. the idea that you can decide what laws to agree or not to agree with or follow or not follow underlines our entire rule of law so i would suggest that is not a great sign to be sending to the people of connecticut and the people of the country, particularly if the governor chooses not to follow the laws of this nation. with respect to sanctuary cities, this is an area that the american people find huge amounts of support.they recognize their tax dollars shouldn't be spent supporting programs and activities in which people are not entitled to. so i think the president has been clear on this that if you are a sanctuary city, declared orundeclared, if you are providing benefits or services , where going to do everything we can to ensure that your state follow the
law. april ? >> comments from the president about people like the general wanting to use trump tower. >> just to be clear, the president was asked at one point, caitlin jenner wasn't tall tower and he said that's great. that's everything he said, it's a statewide issue. and that's entirely what we believe, that the state wants to pass a law or rule or an organization wants to be in compliance with the state rule, that's their right. it shouldn't be the federal government getting in the way of that. the law that was passed in 1952 did not contemplate or consider this issue. number two, the procedure for this guidance letter that was done through the obama administration was not properly followed. there wasn't any commentary, no input from parents, teachers or administrators,
none. we think about how this was implemented the last administration, there was zero input. there was zero commentary from teachers, students. they never had say in how this was implemented. number three, there's a reason texas had this matter enjoyment. because it didn't follow the law and it had procedural problems. for, it's a statewide issue. five, i think we do have to recognize that children do enjoy anti-bullying statutes that are in all every state and if there's a difference between being compassionate for individuals and children struggling with something, we want to make sure they're protected and how it's being done. i think the president has a big heart as we talk about and there's a big difference. personally, he addressed this issue when it came up with respect to one of his properties but he believes that's not a federal, it's not a federal government issue. it's an issue left to the
state and it's an issue that, there's a reason in august of last year that the court joined this , because it had follow the law and the procedure, the comment. and the solicitation of opinions and ideas wasn't followed. it was jammed down the process. so we are actually following the law and that's the way it's been done. >> the human rights campaign. >> i wasn't finished. >> on following on your question why don't we let april fall in line and then will get to tom. >> i have something on another issue. on the hp executive order, the executive orders coming out sometime on east coast, you are working out issues of opening up specifically to take the hp v initiative out of the department of education and bringing into the white house. who will be adding that to figure that out and also can
you figure out how we know that office out because that's one of the big pieces of this. >> respectfully, we're working through the process. obviously that is something were committed to getting done by the end of black history month but there's a commitment by the president and his staff to really focus on this issue and give us the proper respect it deserves so if you will bear with us a couple more days, i promise we will have more to say on that. >> i just want to be clear, i'm not going to get into the details. it's sort of my blanket issue on non-issue executive orders but i know there's something by the president and his staff that he's been clear with us that he wants that on the end of this month. now john. >>. >> in the last campaign responding to the guidance,
this is not a state issue in civil rights issue and therefore is in the purview of the federal government. do you disagree that this is a civil rights issue? >> it's a question of where it's appropriately addressed. we got to remember this guidance was enjoined last august by a court. it hasn'tbeen enforced. there was no comment. by anyone , by the human rights campaign, by teachers, parents, students. nobody had any input into this. it seems to me interesting that if this was any other issue, people would be crying foul that the process wasn't followed. the reality is that when you look at that title ix, it was and acted in 1972. the idea that this was even contemplated is preposterous on its face. that doesn't mean the president, the product president obviously understands the issue and the challenges young children face. he believes this is a state issue that needs to be addressed by state as he does with a lot of other issues we talk about.
so we are a statewide party, the president a lot of issues believes in states rights. i don't see why this would be any different. again, it's how the guidance is issued. it's the legal basis on which it was ordered. it fell short on a lot of points. it wasn't us thatdid this, it was the court that stepped in and said they had follow the procedure of the law in august of last year and enjoined the case . >> i'm wondering does the white house is agree with the position that this is a civil rights issue? >> it's not a question of whether this is a civil rights issue, it is appropriately addressed at the state level, kelly. >> does the president personally believe that any student who is transgender should be able to use the bathroom of their choice, personal belief. >> the president believes it's a states rights issue. i understand what you're asking and i think that as he pointed out when the issue came to one of his own properties, it was very clear . but what he doesn't want to do is forces issues or beliefs down. he believes that the states rights issue.
>> i understand that and i think he's sympathetic to children who deal with that and this is up to this date in schools within a particular district to address how they want to accommodate that and not be prescriptive from washington. that's what the president believes. >> you mention this order was conscripted by a court in the process. that exact criticism has been levied on the in ministrations first executive order on the travel ban. can you say why you are relying on that same enjoined by the court criticism of the process for one but not the other? >> i think there's a big difference. there's no way that you can read title ix from 1972 to anybody and say that was even contemplated back then. it wasn't. there's nobody that is possibly suggesting it's a law that was passed in 1972 did that. number two,there was zero
comments period . hold on, let me answer the question. there is also a strong wind and you read 1182, us code that it's very clear president does have the authority. they're very much apples and oranges issues. one is very clear that the president is told by congress in us code that he has the authority to do what is necessary to protect the american people. there's no way that anybody above the fifth grade reading level could interpret that differently. there's a difference between looking at a statute from 1972 and saying something was complicated back then. not only that, it's a multifaceted thing. when you look at how it's a guidance issue, there was zero comments period. nobody was able to wait way in on that situation back then. when you're forcing schools to make an accommodation from
the federal level in schools, parents, teachers, kids were not able to have any input in that decision from washington, i think it's a very clear difference. john.>> back to shawn. just going back, in a story that got relatively little attention at the time, over a distinguished lawyer asked his name be withdrawn when he was on the periphery of being named us solicitor general so my question is a two-parter. first, can you confirm or deny the administration is now vetting mister mcdowell who is a former nominee for the court of appeals as solicitor general before the visa delay case gets to the supreme court and the second, cooper said he did not want to go through the same experience that jeff sessions, his good friend did when he had the confirmation hearings vote in the senate. does that make the president a little bit discouraged about getting the nominees he wants for very important positions?>> thanks john
and i'd say on the first part, as you know and i'll give you the same answer on executive orders, don't comment on personnel decisions until they're made so i got nothing for that. on the second part, what i would say is the president is very confident we have a deep bench of folks who during the transition we talked about the number of people whose express a huge interest in joining the president on fulfilling this agenda and that list is robust and long. however, that being said i think for both have to go through the senate confirmation and to watch what has happened to some of thesefine individuals , that delay actions, the tearing part of their personal lives, it is discouraging some of these people in terms of mister cooper and others were looking at the process i would like to see part of this administration help build this vision and its agenda but this is what they're going to have to go through. one of an isolated case, i
definitely understand what he's talking about here and i think though they are few and far between, i think that when you realize what is happening largely at the expense of democrats in order to dragging these people through a very delayed and arduous process for purely political points, i think there are some people who could look at that process and potentially i don't want to serve. luckily we've not come to that beyond a handful of votes. largely people have a huge desire and are willing to make great sacrifices both financially and personally to serve in the administration because they understand what potential change this president is bringing to this country and the city. but i understand his point . >> the president talked about really bad dude, you talk about precision. the homeland security insisted, does the president intend or desire as some advocates worry, that people
who are here illegally for something is evil as traffic violations, that those people be subject to deportation? >> everybody who is in this country for obvious reasons, if you overstay a visa, commit a crime, you can't by the very nature of you not being legal, you can be subject to deportation. that's by definition. being in this country is a privilege, not a right. i think we have a right to make sure that people in this country are here for a good process and as i said over and over again, the president recognizes there are people in the country who are not here legally and that we have to have a systematic and pragmatic, methodical process of going through those individuals make sure that the people who have posed a threat to public safety or have a criminal record are the first that are gone. what we've done, to be clear is untied hands of ice and border control agents and say your job is to enforce the law.
first and foremost, in the previous administration their hands have been tied. it was exception after exception. and the fact of the matter is that we are a nation of laws and we have to have a system of legal immigration that is respected so i'm not going to be prescriptive in terms of what ice job is but their job and mission is to protect the country and enforce our borders and immigration laws and the president is basically instructing them to carry out their mission. so the priorities as we discussed over and over again is to do that in a way that is in accordance with the law but also prioritizing those people that pose a threat. i'm going to go to what we brought from the topic in politics in arkansas. >> thanks john, business and politics here in arkansas, that's home of the rowdy is town halls in the nation. i have a question on medical marijuana.
our state voters passed a medical marijuana amendment in november, now we are in conflict with federal law as many other states are. the obama administration kind of chose not to strictly enforce those medical marijuana laws. my question to you is with jeff sessions at the department of justice as ag, was going to be the trump administration's position on marijuana legalization whether it's in state or federal conflicts like this? >> there's two distinct issues here. medical marijuana and recreational marijuana. i think medical marijuana, i said before the president understands the pain and suffering that many people go through were facing especially terminal diseases and the comfort that some of these drugs including medical marijuana can bring to them. that's one congress through a writer in 2011, i think poisoned the appropriations bill saying the department of justice wouldn't be funded to go after those.
there's a big difference between that and recreational marijuana and i think when you see something like the opioid addiction crisis blossoming in so many states around this country, the last thing we should be doing is encouraging people. there is still a federal law that we need to abide by in terms of recreational marijuana and other drugs of that nature so i think there's a big difference between medical marijuana which states have where it's allowed in accordance with the appropriations side have set forth a process to administer and regulate that usage versusrecreational marijuana, that's a different subject . >> shannon. shannon, this isn't a tv program. shannon. you don't get the op questions, were going to raise our hands like boys and girls. it's not your job to yellow questions.shannon, please
go. >> on the manufacturing summit, the afl-cio cited and i did want to follow up with medical marijuana question. is the federal government to take further action around recreational marijuana? >> i think that's a question for the department of justice, i do believe there should be greater enforcement of it. because again, there's a big difference between the medical use which congress has through an appropriations writer in 2014 made very clear what the intent was. down the department of justice would handle that issue, that's different than the recreational use which is something the department of justice will be further looking into. i'm sorry shannon, what was your first question? >> the afl-cio was invited to the manufacturing meeting. >> this was just focused on people who, they were not i don't believe part of this one. we know we had union representation at other
meetings. this was specifically for people who are hiring people and heading, they are having to create additional jobs, hire more people and obviously while the president values their opinion, that's why they been involved, this was pacifically a manufacturing, people who hire people, whomanufacture and grow the economy . it's that situation. andre. >> thank you. a question on russia. general danforth, they had a meeting with the russian council. is the president pleased with the results? and what comes next? >> both of them had an opportunity to meet with their counterparts in different locations ironically on the same day. that was yesterday. and they both had very productive discussions. the president was very pleased with the outcome of that so i would refer to that
with dent general dunford. >> discussing the where and when for the summit? >> i don't have any updates on that but outlook into that. okay. >> you said you will seek greater enforcement of it? >> i would refer you to the department of justice. i think then that's what i said. the department has the lead on that. that is something you should follow up with with them but they are going to continue to enforce the laws on the books with respect to recreational marijuana. i think it was pretty real. >> yvonne trump was in the white house today for a meeting on human trafficking. we saw her in a smaller session at the white house
today. what exactly is the role here? >> i think her role is to be helpful and provide input on a variety of areas that she has passionate concerned about, especially in the areas of women in the workforce and empowering women. she is someone who has a lot of expertise and wants to offer that, especially in the area of trying to help women. she understands that firsthand and because of the success that she has, her goal is to figure out in the understanding that she has as a businesswoman to use her expertise and understanding to empower and help women have the same kind of opportunity and success that she has . >> is that a formal role? >> no, nothing more area last night the meeting that she had in baltimore was one that she had done on her own. there's areas that she's cared very passionately about before her time in the white house. or before coming to the white house and now that her father is in the white house, she continues to seek a platform that helps empower and lift
up women and give them ways that they can be there. >> on the human trafficking, the president said when you talk about solving this kind of problem is a nice word but really, he suggested more likely it's how to help out on that problem. what's his definition of success in this? what is goal? is it more criminal penalties? i read out earlier that the president understands this is a serious problem both for adults but particularly for children whoare being sold both domestically and internationally and it's why we brought these groups in, to make sure we figure out how we make that number is close to zero as possible . >>
to get the pipeline moving and so we will have a further update on that but i think we are in constant contact with the officials there. kristen. [inaudible] >> 82% of transgender children -- is the president leaving some of these children open to being bullied in school? >> that are bullying laws and policies in place. >> children say -- >> hold on. >> they cannot use the bathroom they feel comfortable -- >> you are missing the point here. the president said a literally
it should be a state decision. he respects the decision of the state so, therefore, -- >> to try to make it a shot of something that doesn't exist. it was the court to stop this in august of last year. so where was the questions last year in august about this? it wasn't implemented correctly, legally of the procedure wasn't followed because the court and at the time it didn't have the authority to do that. you are asking us why we're following the law that wasn't followed. and the reality -- hold on. no, no. we're not not reversing it. that is a misinterpretation of the scenario. the court stopped it. it enjoined it august of last year because it wasn't properly drafted and it didn't follow the procedures and there was no legal basis for it any thought of institute in 1972. so hold on. for you to use those terms frankly doesn't reflect what the situation actually is and how it happened.
so to talk about as reversing something that was stopped by the court -- no-no. no, we are not aware basically saying that it's a states' rights issue. if a state chooses to do as i mentioned to april, when this circumstance came up at one of the presidents own properly she was clear about his position on this. for you to turn around and say what message is the president saying, where was the message we sent it last year? i think the message shows he's a guy with a heart that instead the trouble many people go through. he also believes the proper legal course for this is with the state party believes in the states ability to do what's right for the state versus another state. so -- >> but the lgbt to merely yesterday said they felt -- >> i understand, but there's a difference between what people may or may not feel and a legal process and the law. and the law right now doesn't allow for an under title ix does best in 1972. 1972. the procedure wasn't followed. the court saw this in august of
last year for a reason. and all we are doing is saying that the proper place for this is in the states. and so for you to suggest what message is this cynical it simple. it's a states' rights issue and the states should enact laws to reflect the values, principles and will of the people and their particular state. that's it plain and simple. >> obamacare very quickly. -- a full repeal and replace of obamacare to quote his words not going to happen. he went on to say most of the framework of the affordable care act is going to be there. do you think he has a point? >> i think book, what we're going to end up with something i've talked about over and over again to work would end up with a more accessible plan that will allow people to see more doctors, have more providers and drive costs down for those of the two guiding principles that we're going to have in what the president is going to work with congress to put forward on. that's it plain and simple.
spirit roads and highways in the united states in many places around the country potholes and of issues affecting the way in which america's trouble. the president has said he would fix these issues during the campaign. what is the status and as a president spoken to the head of the city or other people? >> i think the president is starting to address that to the budget process. it will be out in mid-march and so the infrastructure project and prayer is the president talked about whether it's a control and our airports on roads and bridges will be something that is going to work with dot but also talk about in his budget and you will see more in his joint address to congress picpic with that, lawrence staps in montana. >> caller: montana has hundreds of miles of border with canada and according to u.s. department of transportation, almost 1 million people come across that border into montana each year. what are the administrations plans to increase security on the canadian border? does the administration have plans to build a wall there? [laughter]
spirit we obviously concerned, thank you, at all sorts of immigration and discussion whether it's from our northern border or southern border. the president understands our southern border is where we have more of a concern in terms of a number of people and the types of activity that is coming over there, the cartels in drug activity. but that doesn't mean we are not paying attention to our northern border as well. we will continue to both monitor and take steps necessary at our northern border to ensure the safety of all americans. yes, sir. >> one question on the south china sea and a follow-up on the kodak pipeline. this week was the first week i believe that the trump administration launch freedom of navigation operations in the south china sea. can you give us a sense of how frequently you are going to be doing those? and then the axis pipeline a few weeks ago president trump said he was trying to negotiate a solution between the standing
rock sioux and energy transfer partners. why hasn't that president intervened and try to initiate those negotiations yet? >> so on the latter, our team has been in contact with both come all the parties involved. they have been working and communicating back and forth. if we have an update on that, but there has been work at the staff level between the parties. and then on the second, on the first part, i've gotten over the update in terms of the frequency at which you have stuff. alexis. >> in reuters there was a report -- [inaudible] can you describe what it is the present has the mike in a timeframe? >> let's just be clear. what he was very clear on is that the united states will not yield its supremacy in this area to anybody. that's what he made very clear. if other countries have nuclear capability and will always be the united states that has the
supreme, supremacy and commitment to the strict obviously that's not what we are seeking to do. the question was asked was about other people growing their stockpiles. i think what he is been clear on is our goal is to make sure that we maintain america's dominance around the world and that if other countries flout it we don't sit back and allow them to grow theirs. >> domestic policy question and then a foreign policy question if you will. you said yesterday that the president had named a task force on the voter fraud probe. when did he named that task force specifically? >> i think two weeks ago. he announced that vice president pence would lead that task force and that the vice president and his team were starting to look at members speeders are you referring to the interviewed what you said it would be a task force, not the something happened? >> that's correct. >> and on foreign policy the president had said in his saturday campaign speech that the gulf states would be paying
for the safe zone in syria. which goal states is referring to? at any committed to paying for that? >> if you look at the readouts with some of the four leaders that is brought up a midget and almost everyone of them and i think his talk about the financing of the safe zone and a commitment that they need to make those. i think by large with that widespread commitment. when we have an update and i think that's an issue that will be ongoing at the second state level as well where you saw secretary tillerson follow up on that with numerous folks. we will have further updates on the funding of the safe zones as we go forward but there has been a general commitment by most of these heads of government to share in the president commitment to help fund these things. steve in michigan. >> caller: thank you. i greatly appreciate. i like to talk to more about tax policy, if a major president trump on the campaign trail talked a lot about tax policy and tax reform. that hasn't happened yet as a nevada want to talk or something
different that's the border adjustable to tax with the manufactured at the white house again today. states like michigan, pennsylvania, wants constant have a great concern. doesn't be a disconnect disconnect between some the cbo's, some of the republicans and the president as whether or not this is appropriate. i guess the question is could this tax have a chilling effect on manufacturing at a time when places like ohio and michigan and the upper midwest are trying to jumpstart the economy with manufacturing jobs? i wish for you to clarify if you could the presidents position. >> thank you. i think the president has been very clear from the beginning that there is no tax if companies manufactured in the united states. we are only a handful of countries that doesn't tax the imports that come into our country. almost every other country operates in their tax code under that system. so what happens is we have a system by which companies abroad can send their products, tax our products going into the country and institute and import tax,
and in their products come into the united states with no import tax. which franco gets a disincentive to companies to stay in the united states, to manufacture in the united states, to hire in the united states. it tilts the field against the american worker. and so the president is looking at tax policy that encourages manufacturing and job creation in the united states. >> but where is this tax, where is he on the stack specifically? >> i understand it and i think what is doing is he met yesterday with his team on the budget. he's talking to secretary mnuchin and others who are working on a comprehensive tax reform plan. remember this isn't something that's been done since 1986. so as we look at it, part of that is to make sure that we lower our corporate tax rate, that would make it more attractive to manufacture and grow jobs in the united states, to make our companies more competitive with companies overseas that frankly better tax
treatment on her own company sue state in the united states. so creating more of a playing field that encourages manufacturing and growing and creating in the united states but make no mistake. if a company in united states is already an expanding in the united states, it will be only to the benefit. it actually if you think about it right now, the way the current tax code works, it almost incentivizes companies from leaving the united states, manufacturing and expanding overseas and then sending their goods and services back to the united states which undermines our own economy. it undermines our workers -- >> the question is about components -- >> i understand, steve. i know that you're on the sky but we'll do like one or two follow-ups. but the answer is that he's working towards the comprehensive tax reform and we will have a played out within the next few weeks i will address that. [inaudible] sent a letter to the supreme court informing them about the
change about the related case. does the termination -- [inaudible] >> i'm sorry, on -- thank you. i'm sorry. removing the guidance clearly does. the guidance that was put forward by the obama administration which clearly had not been done in a proper weight in terms of how they solicited or rather didn't solicit comments. the guidance that puts forward obviously since a signal to the court unworthy administration stands on this issue. >> can i ask you about syria? two quick questions. first, the talks, peace talks in geneva. not detected a clear strategy on the political track from the administration so what is the president thinking on that. and in particular what his thinking on the future of president assad, what he can say oon in a transition or speed isi would refer you to the state about on the status of the talks. i understand that and it's one of the things the president
whether it's a safe zones or how we deal with syria and the problems -- >> the thinking on -- >> right com, i understand that, thank you. no. >> one other question uncertainty if you don't mind. the fault of the town in northern syria and development on the battlefield creates some space in that town has fallen to the turks and the position is that the sort of space the present would like to see? >> look, we're not trying to be prescriptive in terms of the geographic location of a safe zone. it's something that by now the president goal is to get commitments from other world leaders both in terms of the funding and a commitment to share in how we do that. so i don't want to get, we're not looking to be prescriptive to date in how done. i think overall we need a greater commitment in the region to make sure that people are committed to a strategy and is safe zones to allow that to stop some of the human suffering
that's going on, and create, while other, while the rest of the conflict ensues. i think that we've got, we've got to dual track this, deal with the conflict as a whole and how we address it and how we deal with isis in combating it. there's a humanitarian piece of this as well with respective states of i think we're looking at both pieces of this as well. >> a follow-up to that? >> secretary of state rex tillerson -- agreement on climate change and the president has also heard from some world leaders about that. can you tell us is the president still committed to pulling out of the paris agreement on climate change? >> i think i will leave secretary tillerson at the conversation he's having with them as far as w working on tha. >> a follow-up to the three question. any time on what comes to when he wants to feel safe zones
being built? i want to go back to the executive order on immigration. you talked about these dual tracks, continued to fight that incorporate can you give us a status update on where the legal fight is and what should be happening? >> so with respect to the executive order, there are several court this is being fought in, 10 or so, and we continue to deal with that in all those in use. and then again i guess the only way to say that and then other dual trackside, where the additional executive order we've talked about earlier that will come out and for the address the problems. we continue to believe that the issues that we face specifically in the ninth district, ninth circuit rather, that we will prevail on come on the merits of that. but on the other challenges, the other venues that we feel equally confident as we did in massachusetts and other venues. it's not a single track system i'm sorry, i know -- >> the supreme court taking
theithere and the other questios on safe zones. >> with respect to the supreme court, we've got to continue to work through the process. so right now it's at the ninth circuit. that's the primary problem that we are addressing and then we don't have any timeline that i can announce today on syrian safe zones. >> i just want to follow-up on this morning meeting. the president said that he gave authorization to couple of countries to buy military equipment from the united states. which countries was he referring to and has he gone to congress to ask for permission? >> we will follow up and get a list for you on that. spin if i could ask again about the delay on the executive order itself next week. is the administration still trying to craft its legal argument to this? why the delay? >> i think i asked and after this earlier. >> i don't understand the delay. >> then i will explain it to you.
i think the president this time we were very careful to understand what the courts concerns were and address them in a follow-up executive order. with respect to win we're going to announce it, part of this is a mature work with appropriate departments and agencies on the implementation of it to make sure it is executed and continue to execute in a flawless manner, that it meets the intent it would serve. we understand the challenges that may come and so we want to do this in a manner that make sure the hill, members, other methods of congress, the appropriate agencies and departments are fully ready to element this when its issue. so that's it. there's really nothing more to it spin if i can follow up there is concern inside the justice department and in homeland security by some officials this afternoon that were reporting that the white house is looking for them to build this legal argument to find a conclusion. >> that's not, basically saying we did our due diligence.
we looked to the departments to ask them to review certain things. last week it was re-brushed stuff picked this week you are saying we're taking our time spent more difficult -- >> that's not true. and i think you using continued funding sources, i think it is being, it will be elevated flawlessly because we've done the right thing and gone to these individuals, sought feedback and guidance and done this in an unbelievably comprehensive way to ensure that departments and agencies that are going to executing and implement this folder are aware of what's happening. but this has been done and it very, very comprehensive way. >> for a few years he unwittingly employed an illegal immigrant as a housekeeper. is this administrative,, administration committed to holding employers accountable when they employ illegal aliens and how does the administration plan to do so?
>> that issue is something that andy puzder was very forthcoming on. and when he recognized the situation that it had occurred, keep it all the appropriate taxes and try to help the individual go through the proper process. and so yeah, we're going to continue to make sure that we hold individuals in compliance with the law. and he did the right thing then, but whether it's companies or individuals, i think we're committed to making sure that people do what's right. >> veronica with fox five, two questions. -- sang the national anthem, requested a meeting with the president, is transient because he going to take that meeting army with anyone from the transgender community doing? >> i think the price it would be welcome to meet with her spirit second question. steve bandit today called the immediate opposition party last week, there were lots of conversation about the fake news. some of said that this is really just a branding of the media,
where he did that in the primaries, branding the marco -- >> that was the president. >> of course dick but is this a branding strategies because i think that's what he believes can absolutely do of course it's real. i don't think you would go out. he's been very clear about his position on the media and how we place it distorts things i don't think -- [inaudible] >> i just said that that is what steve's view is 30 minutes overtime and i think is very clear on this. sarah. >> back to the board of adjustment tax president trump told reuters that it does support some form of a border tax. how does the present respond to critics of sync the border adjustment tax will be passed on to lower income and middle-class families in the form of higher prices for goods and high prices for gas? >> is a look at holistic, the first thing to understand is there is no tax if you are manufacturing in the united states. so there can be no higher cost. if you think about it, right now
we have to look at this in a holistic way. which is when a company chooses to leave our country and she had american jobs so they can move overseas and then some back to us at a lower price, there's a big cost becomes our economy, to our workers. we've got to look at this company actively but if a company chooses to stay and grow in the united states, hire more people it actually be a net savings. if you think about it because it would be the companies who are overseas who have chosen to move out to a face a higher cost under these kinds of plans. that's a big difference. you will benefit consumers, benefit workers and our economy. when you really think about the economic impact about that, that benefit our economy to it helps our american workers did it grows more jobs, gross manufacturing base. and again we are probably one of only a handful of developed countries that don't have a tax system that looks at this. so right now it's american and
american workers and american manufacturing that are at a disadvantage of the current regulatory and tax system, not the other way around. thank you, guys to have a great day. touch base tomorrow in some way. i will see you then. tune into cpac to see the president. >> has the president spoken to mexico? [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> watch c-span as president donald trump delivers his first address to a joint session of congress. >> this congress is going to be the busiest congress we've had in decades. >> live tuesday and 19 eastern
on c-span and c-span.org. listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> this week and on american history tv on c-span3, this saturday at 930 am eastern we all live from the library of virginia in richmond for an all-day symposium on civil war monuments, the history under construction in the north and south and up on the perception of confederate monuments has changed. then at eight on lectures in history hamdan sydney college professor john coons on how the rise of tobacco consolidate the power of wealthy virginia planters in london merchants in the 17th century. >> instead of accepting the prize this friendship captain might have to offer me i'm instead going to send the track over to england on my own account and i'm going to pay a commission to someone to market it there for me. this developing consignment trade ties larger planters of virginia and maryland to these english merchants.
most of them in london. >> sunday at noon on oral histories, we continue with our series of interviews with prominent african-american women from the explorations in black leadership oral history collection, dorothy height served as president of the national council of negro women from 1957-1998 and received the presidential medal of freedom and congressional gold medal. >> i grew up, and even in my religious experience working with people with different religious backgrounds, with a feeling of importance of openness and how much each one contributes to the other, that there is no superior, no inferior. >> and on the presidency, historian catherine clinton talks about what happened to president lincoln's family after his assassination. >> the morning of may 19 convinced his mother might do herself harm and prodded by a team of medical and legal
experts, robert lincoln file an affidavit to have his mother tried on charges of mental incompetence. she could be held against her will do to quote insanity spirit for our complete american history tv schedule go to c-span.org. >> up next kentucky republican governor of matt bevin gives his of the commonwealth address from the state capital in frankfort. among his top priority are limited common core education which started during the obama administration and creating more charter schools in the commonwealth. this is just short of one hour. >> wow. it is good to be here in speaker hoover's house. in the house of the people, is it not? it really is. [applause] it really is.