tv Democratic Leaders Preview President Trumps Address to Congress CSPAN February 28, 2017 12:06pm-1:19pm EST
it will be up to him whether he walks down and wants to shake hands with them but that will be a series of interactions that will be very interesting to watch. >> greg stohr, thank you. >> sure. >> numerous new source of reporting on the economy today. "the associated press" says the government reports the economy grew at what they're calling an anemic 1.9% in the fourth quarter, unchanged from initial estimate. consumers perform better than first thought, growth for 2016 overall was just 1.6%, the poorest showing in five years. that story from the ap today. yesterday house minority leader nancy pelosi and senate democratic leader charles schumer spoke with reporters about their agenda for the 115th congress and the president address to congress and the nation tonight. >> thank you very much. thank you and congratulations to you for your election as
president of this historic national press club. thank you, jonathan for arranging all of this. it's an honor to be here with chuck schumer, when he will wile here momentarily, the newly elected leader of the senate, democrat, and newly elected, reelected member of the senate from his state of new york. he comes with the confidence of his colleagues and the enthusiastic support of his constituents. you will tell him i said that, right? so tomorrow it's 40 days into the new administration. president trump will deliver his address, his first address to a joint session of congress. as we have been reminded every time the president or anyone from his administration speaks to the american people dealing with this administration demands that we stand up for the fax. and the facts are these. on january 20, 2009 in the
middle of the worst economic catastrophe since the great depression, president obama and his inaugural address called for swift, bold action now to create jobs and lay a foundation for economic growth. one week and one day later, the democratic house passed their american recovery and reinvestment act, one week after that the senate passed the bill and unfriendly 17, president obama signed it into law. four weeks from his inauguration. he had already signed the lilly ledbetter fair pay act and the children's health insurance program, and other progress as well. four weeks into his administration. by the time a few days later federal 24 when he made his first address to a joint session of congress he could report on what he asked for in his inauguration, what he had already accomplished.
creating or saving 1 million jobs and so much else. we are not allowed to apply but if we could we would be applauding for you right now, welcome. i talked about you already. at that joint address president obama could report on his start progress made on creating jobs and bold commitment to education, innovation, clean energy and rebuilding america's infrastructure. tomorrow, 40 days after his inauguration, president trump and the republican congress will have not lifted a finger to create jobs or raise wages for hard working american families. instead, the president has put wall street first pickiest tried to make america sick again. he has instilled fear into marriages across america and he has allowed russia's grip on his
administration to jeopardize our national security and undermine our democracy. putting wall street first, republican congress and the trump administration both quickly to enable profiteering by wall street come his wall street friends at the expense of hard-working americans. we just two into his administration president trump acted to unravel dodd-frank reform, putting main street back at the mercy of wall street. on the same day he eliminated the rule that financial advisors act in the best interest of their clients. and house republicans are made it harder for 60 million americans to save for retireme retirement. these actions will worsen the conditions that fuels his candidacy. president trump engaged in a bait and switch agenda. no jobs, no retirement security
and no health security either. instead of acting on jobs, republicans will make america sick again, declaring all-out war on affordable health care from the affordable care act to medicare to medicaid, all of which are now wed. affordable health care at transformational success in expanding coverage, improving benefits and lowering costs. it extended the life of the medicare trust fund, lowered prescription drug costs for seniors and provided free preventative care, keeping seniors healthier. it also expanded medicaid. now a vital tool in the fight against the opioid epidemic and a major funder of seniors in nursing homes. or even to go there for daycare. as republican governor john kasich said, thank god we expanded medicaid, because that medicaid money is helping to
rehab people. more than, under the affordable care act more than 20 million previously uninsured americans now have coverage. under the affordable care act 55 million americans who get their insurance through their employer cannot be denied coverage because of a pre-existing medical condition, are not protected from lifetime limits on care. their children can now stay on their policy until age 26. and being a woman is no longer a pre-existing medical condition. republicans seek to dismantle all this progress, and their plan, republicans will give each of the wealthiest 400 families in america a $7 million tax break each year. 400 wealthiest families in america.
$7 million tax break each year. and forced tens of millions of americans middle-class families to pay and massive new tax on employer-provided health coverage. maybe that affects you. again, instead of acting on jobs, the trump administration has prioritize a brutal agenda to target vulnerable populations and instill fear that the presidents muzzle and refugee ban dishonors our values, violates our constitution and undermines our nation's fight against terror. he has launched a cruel deportation dragnet that will tear families apart and has called law-abiding immigrants out of church shelters, courtrooms and schools. and just last week president trump building heartbreaking blow to transgender children in our schools, a struggle group of lgbt young people who are the
most at risk. and all of this to deflect attention away from his failure to advance on jobs agenda and to deflect attention away from his russian connection. i called him the deflector in chief. the president says his actions are to make america safer. the fact is he is making america less safe. president trump's reckless agenda and incompetent judgment is jeopardizing the security of our nation. the president handed the national security council to a white supremacist. in the first month of the trump white house we saw the resignation of the national security advisor, and we saw the chief of staff pressured the fbi over investigations into a connections between the senior trump officials and the russians. the american people deserve the truth. what did the russians have on donald trump that he would flirt
with lifting the sanctions against russia because of their aggression in eastern europe, that he would undermine the s.t.a.r.t. treaty? praise putin and stonewall any investigation to bring the truth to light. including anything but his tax returns. when the president talks about a mess, he's talking about his own first 40 days in office, which she utterly squandered. democrats believe that we must focus every day on job creation and drawing paychecks for everyone everywhere in our country. we should be creating jobs, rebuilding america's infrastructure, investing in science, education and innovation that would drive the jobs of the future and unleash the full potential of our country. five weeks ago we had a peaceful transfer of power, the inauguration of a new president although in president trump spoke of carnage and decay it
was a sad day for our country. the next morning dawned with a peaceful show of power where women and their families marched for our values in harmony and with good spirit. it was organic, personal, powerful. the women, men and children who poured into the streets of the women's march, those who turned out at airports shortly thereafter in town halls in the weeks since, they honor the vision of our founders. president trump has made authoritarian choices, choices in favor of secrecy, the tool of authoritarians, instead of transparency and openness, the essential to the democracy. calling the press the enemy of f the people is a cause for great alarm. and just one reason for the americans to be vigilant, very, very vigilant. the american people are mobilizing as long as republicans continue down this destructive and radical path,
the public resistance will only increase. as president lincoln said, public sentiment is everything. with it you can do almost anything. without it, almost nothing. in the halls of congress and the districts across america, democrats will did the fight against president trump's dangerous bait and switch, deflector in chief agenda. it's now my honor to present as senate leader chuck schumer, i said earlier he comes as a new leader with a full confidence of his senate caucus and the overwhelming support of his constituents in new york, and he is leading the charge against trump agenda in a sense. senator schumer. >> thank you, nancy. >> they are not allowed to applaud spin like church. or synagogue. okay. well, i want to thank leader pelosi. nancy, you continue to be just an outstanding leader of the democrats in the house, and i
want to thank the national press club for hosting us this afternoon. before i get into tomorrow's speech i want to briefly take a step back and look at the first month of the trump presidency and how democrats in the senate have stood up to the president. after the election we democrats were down in the dumps. republicans turned, return matures to both houses and prepared for the first republican president in eight years. my daughters came to be. as upset as i was election night and i taught them the old song, those of you my age may remember it. mama said that they would be days like this. it would be days like this, my mama said. but a few days after the election i realized that had the election gone the other way and hillary had been president and i've been majority leader, i certainly would've had more fun. and leader pelosi and i probably would've been able to get more
good things done, which is why we're here. but i realized that with trump as president and myself as minority leader, our job is even more important. we democrats are steeled for the fight, and it's already paying some dividends. frankly, we had a better first month that i think most would have imagined. just look at the two biggest debates, the two biggest things the senate has taken up so far, the affordable care act in the cabinet. first on the aca. at the beginning of the year all the abundance were wondering if democrats would stay united over the aca act. republicans were convinced they could bring more moderate democrats with them and come up with a bipartisan repeal and replace effort. one month later, two things have happened. republicans have not been able to pick off a single democrat to support any of their plants. we have shown a united front.
while the republican warfare has been on full display. they can't agree on a timeline to repeal the aca. they can't agree on what to replace it with, or even whether they should call it repeal and replace anymore. who would've thought one month after the fight over the aca, it's the republicans not the democrats who are in disarray, on defense, and pointing at one another like an abbott and costello show. i predict the discord in the party will grow as republicans turned to washington after this last week of angry town halls. i believe the odds are very high we will keep the aca. it will not be repealed. the debate on the presidents cabinet is a second paper democrats have done much better than expected. when we entered the confirmation
process we really didn't expect to defeat any of the nominees. we knew the republicans would be under tremendous pressure to walk in lockstep. but we didn't want to rush the nominees through. our first goal was to stretch them out so that the american people could get a look at who they were. well, mcconnell suggested we do all the cabinet nominees on january 23. that quite didn't happen. and what we have done is our second point and the most important point. we have exposed the cabinet for what it is, a swap cabinet of billionaires and bankers who lack basic confidence, whose views are the trail about donald trump promised in the campaign so we've achieved our goal and him look good effect on democrats, and more importantly, on america, in the coming months. when hhs secretary price tried to cut medicare and medicaid,
the public knows his record and will be on this case about it. when betsy devos tries to shift money away from public schools, the public knows her record and will be on her case. and when scott pruitt undermines environmental protections for clean air and clean water, the public will be wise to his record and on his case. and, of course, labor won't have to deal with the viciously anti-labor. because of what democrats did during the confirmation process, these cabinet officials, all of them, are going to have to look over their shoulders after everything they do. so on both the cabinet and aca, the two biggest issues we faced, as a cynic, in the first month, democrats are united and on offense, republicans are divided on defense. we're doing a lot better than we thought. next, the presidents speech.
what about the speech tomorrow night and the administration so far? well, in the first month as nancy said on tv yesterday, the president hasn't done very much. but what he has done is forsake his promises to the working class, favoring the interests of the rich and powerful while shifting the burden on to working families. it reminds me of the old joke of two men at a diner. one says to the other, g, this food is terrible. and the other man replies, yeah, but at least the portions are small. first phase, first part, the president hasn't done much. so far the president and republicans in congress have undone a few regulations that were an afterthought of the obama administration. but when the president signs them he makes them seem like they are the greatest thing ever done.
jobs continue to lead america despite the presidents boasts. the president is very proud of keeping one half of one carrier plant here in the united states. while even at carrier, 1300 jobs are still leaving. and thousands more leave our shores each month from all over the country. there is no plan, no plan to stop that. the transpacific partnership was dead in the water a day president trump took office. leader mcconnell said during the election, before november election day, he said he didn't think he had the votes for it and wouldn't bring it up to the floor. so an executive order removing the u.s. from tpp doesn't mean a thing. the president said this is one of the greatest accomplishments we've had in a very long time. mr. president, it had already been accomplished by many of us who oppose tpp in the house and the senate. and on the big promises that could help working america, infrastructure, trade, even on
the aca, the trump administration has not even presented a proposal to congress. folks close to the president say he's going to be a president of great impact. thus far, he's been the seat himself to be a president of little impact. and all too often the little he has done seems to be a broken promise to working people. this foretells that in future months burden after burden will be shifted off the special interests and on to the working people. just look at the promises he's broken to working people so far. he broke his promise to working americans when he loaded his administration with wall street insiders. his already trying to roll back wall street reform, despite saying during the campaign is going to stick up for the working man against wall street, total 180-degree reversal. he broke his promise to working
americans when asked one of his first actions in office he made it harder for them to afford a mortgage. $500 more to help the banks. he broke his promise to working americans wendy halted implementation of a rule that would have better protected retirement savings of working people from abusive practices, helping financiers, hurting the working people. when millions of americans, middle-class americans who worked hard where do a long-awaited bumping overtime pay, the trump administration indicated it would likely take that away. he broke his promise to working americans when his administration refused to label china currency manipulator even though he said so many times in this campaign, i heard him, i was happy when i heard him say that, even though i didn't think he would win. but he said he is going to label china currency manipulator on day one. now they are backing off.
he broke his promise to working americans when after vowing not to cut social security, medicare or medicaid during the campaign, he proposes to cut medicaid and chooses cabinet secretaries who spent their careers trying to eviscerate social security and medicare. one fact checker said that of the 60 explicit promises he made about his first 100 days, only six have been kept and 45 have no action taken whatsoever. so just to repeat, the first month of a trump presidency is less bang, less of a bank and more of a whimper. not much impact, but what he has done so far has shifted the burden off of the special interests and the wealthy and on to working families. the portions are small, the food is terrible. with respect to the speech tomorrow night, i fully expect the president to resort to the
same populist message he used in his campaign in his inaugurati inauguration, full of grandiose promises to the working people of america, to gloss over the reality of his administration. it will be the usual bluster and blame, populist platitudes will be a dime a dozen, but the focus should be on the president actions rather than his empty words. because as we've seen, the things he talks about usually don't happen. so tomorrow night, if past is prologue, the president will use populist rhetoric in his speech, but he won't back it up with real actions. he will talk like he favors the working people, it is actions will desert them. he will present himself as a populist, but govern from the hard right. in that respect president trump's address to congress is far less important than past presidential addresses.
because he speech is to indicate what he's actually going to do. the matter of real importance is how the president will govern. what a govern like his campaign against both establishments, democrat and republican? or was a govern from the hard right, like his vice president and his cabinet want him to do? is a speech tomorrow will mean nothing. they very instance after it is delivered in less it backs up his words of loyalty to working families with real actions, his speech tomorrow will be nothing if he and his cabinet of billionaires and bankers who continue to govern from the hard part right, which is very far from the american mainstream, even from the republican mainstream, his speech tomorrow will mean nothing if this president continues to do as he has done these first few weeks, breaking promises to working people, and putting an even greater burden on their backs
while making it even easier to be wealthy and well-connected in america. don't applaud. [laughter] >> thank youthank you, leader s. a couple of questions before we serve it out to our colleagues here. some of the aspects of the budget blueprint are starting to emerge. $54 billion the president has said we are going to do less with more, a giant boost in defense spending and a lot of cuts on the domestic side. have you had a chance to look at it? and what do you think? leader pelosi. >> come to the microphone or can we talk from here? >> i think -- can we bring that over here? >> we haven't seen all the
particulars of the budget, but as the senator said, just look at the personalities who are helping shape it. omb has been a personal even today said even though they don't indicate whether you be cutting medicare, social security and the rest, that's not off the table. can't hear? go over there. while we haven't seen all of the particulars of the budget, a budget should be a statement of our national values. what is important to us as a nation should be where we put our investments. the debate on the budget is one that has been going on for a number of years and we've come to some bottom line, some baselines about how we go forward. this is a major departure from that come with a high concentration of billions of dollars on the defense side and cuts on the domestic side.
we reviewed the strength of our country to be measured certainly in the source of our strength of our military, but also into education of our children, health and well-being and welfare of the american people. so this budget that has gone forth should be no surprise because it's a reflection of some of the attitudes of the director of omb who even today said that cuts in medicaid and medicare and the entitlements are not off the table. remember, this is the republican party, trickle-down economics. tax cuts for the rich, and if it trickles down two jobs, that would be great. if it doesn't, so be it. that's the free market. we are talking about trickle up, invest in education and the rest, and in the budget show our values there and build the strength of her country both ways, military might and strength of the american people.
what they will do in order to not increase the deficit is we will have perhaps a 10% cut across the board. we don't know yet where they are getting that over $50 billion cut, but it would cut nih by $3.2 billion which we would lose 1000 grants to medical researchers. the biblical power to qr curtailed, whether scientific opportunity we had a moral responsibility to invest in. head start, 100,000 low income kids would be cut out of head start. job training, 50,000 individuals would be cut from that, if they do an across-the-board cut. and we don't know what that is. but we do know about the director of omb is that he led the charge to shut down government, and he voted against opening up government a few years ago. and that was with the house republican budget number.
even rejected that. and, of course, is not a believer in the full faith and credit of the united states of america, in terms of lifting the debt ceiling when that comes in a few months. so we have to see more about this budget, but hopefully it would honor the 50/50 that we had before, and cuts or increases had to be shared equally between domestic investments that would make in our future as well as the necessary investments that we make in our security. when we see more, we can speak to it more precisely. this is a really bad path that we've seen so far. i don't even know, i don't even know if the president really understand the ramifications of the cuts that are being proposed. with that i yield to the distinguished senator spirit nancy sumpte something basicalli think, too, which is --
microphone. stand by your mic. so i agree with nancy. we don't know where the cuts are coming from, but it's hard to see with this magnitude of cuts that once again, middle-class people, working families are going to be hurt. they are going to almost certainly by what it said breathe the dirty air and drink earlier water, even after we have had flipped. they are almost certainly going to be much less protected against financial rapacious agencies that try to take advantage of them. the budget proposal is a reflection of where the president is at, who years. today's hard right republican party which is in this budget through its cabinet believes in, which is relieve the burdens on the wealthy and special interests, whether they be all
companies or financiers, and put the burden on the middle class. >> on that subject i always say, show me your values, show me your budget. i think this is not going to be a statement of values of the american people when we see it. thank you. >> one follow-up. there's a question just pure numbers in the house and the senate. don't they basically have the vote to carry out what they want to do, just like they have the cabinet and now this budget blueprint? >> that's what anyone said about aca, and the fact that they're coming from the hard right makes it a lot harder for them to even get a full complement of republicans, even using reconciliation, if they lose three republicans, they don't get their budget. we don't know where these cuts are yet, but given the magnitude it's hardly a certainty that the republicans the march in
lockstep with this budget spirit and remember on the entitlement, we never present lincoln public sentiment everything. if, in fact, they go into any cuts in terms of medicare, this is who they are. effectively didn't support it when it was initiated years ago. and then during the '90s there -- nursing wasn't medicare should wither on the vine. and now we are to this place where people are saying government, keep your hands off my medicare. obviously an interesting phrase. but the fact is that when you go to places like medicare, when they go to places like medicaid, 50% of the cost of seniors in nursing homes is covered by medicaid. this is a middle-class entitlement now. we think of it as poor children who need it desperately, but it's very much about seniors in
nursing homes which touches the middle class ticket. it's very much about the opioid epidemic and rehab that governor kasich was talking about. so they have some pretty explosive places to go, if they intend to go down this path. and the public will react to that, and nothing is more eloquent to a member of congress, in the house or the senate, then the voice of his or her own constituents, wouldn't you say, leader? >> i would speak with one quick wit on russia. yesterday leader pelosi you were on the sunday shows talking about wanting to have an investigation into contacts between the incoming trump administration and those agents, russia. the house intelligence chairman did a press conference earlier today saying that intelligence community told him that is basically nothing there yet. that he knows. how do you respond to that?
>> let me just say that if hillary clinton had won the election, still think we should of had an investigation as to the russian disruption of our election. it's about our democracy, and it's about russians were trying to do this in other countries as well, to undermine democracy. so this is a very big deal. when it comes specifically to donald trump, we're asking for an independent commission to investigate the personal, political and financial ties of donald trump, his organization from his businesses to the russians. it's very important to the american people to know the truth. why else would he be putting putin on a pedestal, according with lifting the sanctions as i mentioned earlier with russia for the aggression into eastern europe? why would he be undermining the s.t.a.r.t. treaty? what is this about? something is strange about this. as far as the chairman of the committee saying what he said, first of all, he knew that from classified information he
shouldn't be saying that. but apart from that if he won't investigate, if they won't follow a path, then h you can't possibly know what he is talking about. this is called stonewalling. what other republicans in congress afraid of, that they would not have and independent commission to take this away from the congress, or an investigation themselves to say we have a look into it, but we know there's nothing there. i mean, please. it's just ridiculous. i don't know if, i know the house and senate intelligence committees are trying to work and a bipartisan way, and i think we should give him time to be able to do that. but the statement made by the chairman today, that really raises serious questions about stonewalling him in my view. and i have a long experience in intelligence. we can do it, congress can play its role, and upset group can play its role.
just show us the facts. tell us the truth. tell the american people the truth and that's why they are attacking you, the press is the enemy of the american people spirit i think we are ready to go out to the audience. >> adam from the "st. louis post-dispatch." during the campaign president trump's said he was the law and order candidate. he said police knew the freedom to be tougher on crime and the attorney generals molded himself in the same fashion. now they were coming out at an administration that has embraced police oversight and police reform, how 40 think the pendulum will swing in the other direction, and what do you plan to do about that? >> well, one of the things we hope to do when i first gave my opening speech as minority leader is oversight, holding the administration accountable. one of our jobs is holding the administration accountable. and if the justice department
veers off track, we will certainly do everything we can to call them out for it. i don't know anything they've done yet in this regard, i'm not going to speculate about it, but if they move away from where the obama administration has been, which i think has been fair and balanced, we will certainly call them out for it. >> i'm club member, op-ed writer and main street radio network. thank you so much for coming to the press club. on two key issues from health and infrastructure, on health care do you really think that there will be no vote for repeal, no loss of recipients, no loss of provisions? will they do more what mike pence said and what trump said in a little quote that they will pass, repeal and of the rudiments of health care and then after a while be able to get to something else?
so that they do tax breaks or future people i keep existing recipients and obamacare? and on infrastructure, do you think that it will be jobs or will it be a disguise of tax breaks and then not really get the job done for infrastructure? >> let me answer the second one for since we democrats in the senate have come out with an infrastructure plan. if it tax breaks, we are not going to be for it. 82 cents of every dollar would go to the people who financed the roads and bridges and water and sewer. and it would create tremendous amounts of tolls. all over the place where they wouldn't be now because these are going to be loaned from private sector people. finally, it won't build thanks in large places, large parts of america, particularly rural america. so that kind of think is a nonstarter and i told the president that. we believe both nancy and i and
the house democrats, senate democrats believe in a strong vital infrastructure bill but it should be paid for. it should have protections of labor and environment. it should be, sorry, it should be with federal expenditures, as infrastructure has always been. not cutting other programs, not using these tax breaks to do it. aca there just and a total pickle. they are hard right, the freedom caucus as we want to repeal but we don't want to put any new money into this. and some of the more mainstream people from states that i'd used medicaid to incident said we won't be for this unless you put money in it. what are they going to do? >> i agree with what the senator said, as the leader said about the infrastructure. they come up with something we can work together on because the structure are long time had been a nonpartisan issue. it always worked together. it wasn't until president obama proposed something on
infrastructure that the republicans resisted and we had to make the initiative smaller. again, if it's a real infrastructure built with investments, let's talk. if it's a tax bill disguise as an infrastructure bill, that's not going to happen because as the center said, yet the taxpayer funding for tax breaks to somebody to build whose deltoid to turn around and charge the consumers all so the taxpayers, the consumer pays twice. that's just not going to happen. let's hope that it isn't so. but let's all recognize the necessity of that infrastructure bill is probably $3 trillion at least in depth in our country, according to the american society of civil engineers. and we have to not only as a president has talked about transportation, that's important, but we have to do as the senate bill does and will support issues that relate to water, broadband, other mass
transit in addition to roads and bridges and high-speed rail, for example. but in terms of other pieces other than transportation, that's a really important part of infrastructure for the future when we talk about broadband. your question on health care is indicative of the fact that they don't even know what they're doing. it's hard to form a question. but from what we've seen so far, 10, press 20 but if speaking of the most defensible number for this though that we have seen, at least 10 million people will lose their coverage. could be 20. his present is said not one person would lose coverage. so it's not only losing coverage, it's losing coverage, reduced benefits, increasing costs. if they can come up with something that doesn't reduce coverage, doesn't reduce benefit package and does not raise the cost, we have something to talk about. but we haven't seen that yet.
>> just going back to russia. leader schumer, do you think the investigation by the senate intelligence committee has been compromised in any way because of chairman burgess contacts with the widest? >> i was very disappointed in his contacts, when the administration asked him to contact news organizations, it certainly gives the appearance, it's not the reality of lack of impartiality. and so i would say i've spoken with senator warner who is our ranking democrat on the committee. the democrats are united in demanding that senator burr give a complete, full investigation without bias, without compromise and just go to the facts wherever they lead. they are put senator burr on notice that they are not getting that, they will then ask for a different type of situation to the come about, whether it's a select committee or something like that.
and we have now heard as i understand it to republicans have been critical of what senator burr has done in statements. i heard that just within the last few hours. so senator burr is on notice, is what he did was wrong, and this is not the way to conduct a fair and impartial investigation that goes whatever the facts lead. >> good afternoon. i understand that you say the defense budget hike is coming at the expense of domestic spin and social services. how important is it for the defense budget cut what sort of priority do you think defense should take under this administration? >> well, we all want a strong defense, and i know some people like john mccain feel that needs to be hiked. i would before commenting on that would look at where they are hiking it and how they're tr hiking it and where it is needed
before i would comment on any proposal. we don't know any of the details. and also to increase the fence by such a large about and then cut the very programs that help middle-class americans keep jobs, get jobs, live better lives seems to me to be just totally wrong and out of whack. >> in order to make a judgment about any increase in defense, and after what the mission is, what is their vision? what is this about and why do they need this money? a great deal of our budget that is not our national security, which is what we take an oath of office to protect and defend people, the constitution, the constitution, defense budget does not include homeland security. it doesn't include the state department and diplomas and the
rest. those include veterans affairs. so much of that comes at the expense of other defense, protecting american people pieces of the budget. so again what is your vision? what is your mission? where are you allocating these resources? and at the expense of other protections for the american people that are in our budget. >> you understand, all of those things are on the domestic side, state, patterns, homeland security, et cetera spirit leader schumer, you voted, i'm sorry, sam. leader schumer come you voted for the 2002 iraq war resolution claiming iraq was pursuing nuclear weapons. do you acknowledge that israel has nuclear weapons? and if i could to leader pelosi, you said that there are no grounds for impeachment against
donald trump, but legal scholars from katharine ross, gw, harvard says there is the congress cannot give consent to a presidents violation of the domestic volume is closed. are you not getting such consent? >> the case is being made about the m.o.u. mode and you have to evidence and the rest before the case has not fully been made. the fact is is that when i was speaker, after we won in 2006, in 07 people want me to impeach president bush because of the war in iraq. i'd never recovered with the left on the subject for not impeaching president bush because of the war in iraq. you don't impeach somebody because you don't like their policies, p. or when they break the law, that's when you have grounds for impeachment. at the time of the war i said as the top democrat on the intelligence committee, the
intelligence does not support the threat. and so did senator bob graham. but the administration was making this strong case with the american people, and perhaps misrepresented the american people could be cause for impeachment. if so, there's plenty of grounds right now with the current president. but it just, it hasn't been the case. that doesn't mean nobody is listening to cases that are being made in a very scientific, methodical way as to whether there are grounds for impeachment. but the fact is that many of we are trying to unite the country. many of the presidents supported are just a ready to to accept the fact that their judgment might never been so great in voting for him. and by the the case is made, perhaps there will be ready to accept that. it's very hard, impeachment. very hard. [inaudible] spirit i didn't get your question. [inaudible] >> i'm not, you can go read the newspapers about that.
[inaudible] >> it is a well-known fact that israel has nuclear weapons, but the israeli government doesn't officially talk about what kinds of weapons and where, et cetera. [inaudible] >> let's move on. >> you've talked about working families. we had senator manchin, senator capito represent mckinley here in the fall talking about how desperate things were for retired coal miners who were in danger of losing their health benefits and pension benefits. there's even talk about the government shutting down, but then that is been extended. president trump in the campaign says he digs call, but what about -- >> i'm sorry, our democratic caucus from one into the other is united with you.
we had made it a condition to move forward at the end of last year, that the miners the least not let their health and if it's expired. been renewed to the next budget of april 28. send it imagine who our leader on this is proposing -- senator manchin -- move forward in a new way what you hear from in the next day or two from him, if he hasn't made that public yet. but we are going to keep going and take up the case of these coal miners who deserve their pensions, who deserve their health benefits. until we get a bill like to build up passed in the finance committee which may discriminate, both health and pension side, get done. as i said tomorrow you hear a little more about that. >> earlier our distinguished president mention that my father had been a member of congress. he also was mayor of baltimore for 12 years.
but in any event one of the things he gave me when i became a congressperson was a card figure of a coal miner. he was in baltimore, maryland. he was very close to jennings randolph, west virginia and all. and so that is in my office, that coal miner. i think where to move off it and where, i'm a staunch supporter of doing that, we have an obligation, responsibility to these coal miners. some of them will be visiting us this week, there coal miners and their widows. so for all the people who go around talking to this goal, that, the rest of it, that they cannot honor the commitment that is been made to these workers is just something so shameful and hypocritical and inconsistent. that's why i voted against the omnibus bill. because it did not put in their come we tried everything here we try to leverage everything we had to get them to be taken care of.
these are coal miners, widows, orphans, and they just,, they just, republicans just wouldn't do it. while singing the praises of king cole, ignoring the needs of the coal miners. it's shameful. >> president trump has submitted privately he wants to get it done. i believe he stated it publicly. went to check the record on that. let him step up to the plate and tell the republicans in the house and the senate, particularly leader mcconnell, this has to get done and has to get done now. he speaks for the coal miners like the little remarks i gave. he gives a good speech about the coal miners and then does nothing to help them. and let's the right wing congress do nothing. >> eric with the times. getting back to the aca, repeal and replace. senator schumer, if push comes
to shove do you think there are three republicans in the senate who would not go along with the repeal at this point? >> i think that's very, very possible, yes. >> well, for a variety of different reasons. i know some of our senators feel very strongly come some other republican senators feel very strongly about knocking out planned parenthood, which i assumed they would would do in their proposal. many of our republican senators who come from states that have gotten good benefits from medicaid that is given health insurance to millions of people across the country don't want to see those repealed. so if the provisions are the one that we've heard about, very close to the ryan plan, i think it may be very difficult for them to get 51 votes in the senate. spirit if i i just may add to that the following. the governors are here this week. week.
we're talking to them about expanding medicaid witches and 31 states, millions receiving coverage who would lose it. i do want to be the one to break the news to you. the republicans don't care about those 20 million people who lose their benefits. they do care about the 155 million who will lose their benefits, pay more for less and they do that as their constituency. so what are they going to do to protect them? and just put out their plan. we haven't seen the cbo report but what we hear is that it's going to cost the federal government more. so that's another arrow in the quiver of fighting against the repeal of aca. but don't underestimate the power of medicaid. a number of republican governors have voted to expand it. you heard the comment of governor kasich, but there are others, i won't use their names here but you can ask them, and hopefully they are weighing in
with the president of the united states. >> three last questions. you, sir, and you, ma'am and you. >> thank you. my name is herman, executive director for the national association for objectivity in science. friday morning in his speech at the cpac meeting, president trump said i'm not saying that the press is the enemy of the people. i'm saying that fake news is the enemy of the people. then later that same day, cbs radio when it was recording on the president's speech to cpac, cbs radio said the president said the press is the enemy of the people. doesn't the president has some reason to be concerned about the press? >> every one of us who is in public life gets criticized by the press, even nancy once in a while.
and someone as good as her. and that's what it's all about. and this president has such a thin skin that when he is criticized by the press, instead of answering the question directly, here is why i disagree with you, or ignoring it, which sometimes you have to do, he gets, he seems to be totally shaken and then he lashes out and says, you are lying, it's fake news, you are un-american, all of that. .. was one of the greatest the president and this president refuses to answer legitimate
criticisms. you want to apply for the press . >> let me go to something else you said. here's the thing i want to pick up that i completely agree with what the senate leader has said in terms of the press. . you put yourself on the line and agree, disagree. none of us is pleased but that doesn't mean we say it's not the champion, the champion of our democracy protecting our democracy is the freedom of the press, the first amendment. as much as i don't like the
coverage, i respect the power of the press to protect and as president bush thinks said earlier today, we go to other countries and other leaders have freedom of the press in their country and then we denounce the press in our own country. it's not a good thing. you mentioned the word science, and we have a couple more questions but i want to say this. i've said sometimes that i had three or four answers. science, science, science and science. ryan's whether it's about good health, whether it's about competitiveness and business and our economy. science toinvest in protect our country . science two again protect this planet which is god's creation so my republican colleagues say to me faith or
science, take your pick. i say science is an answer to our prayers and that's why evangelicals join us in our protection of the planet because they believe as ui that this is god's creation and we have a moral responsibility to protect it so whether it's health, national security, the air our children breathe or our economy, science, science, science. that's what i would hope tomorrow you hear from the president the presentation about what he would do in light of innovation and the rapid pace of innovation. the president referenced in one of his last press conferences, one of his last beaches that innovation is moving so rapidly that that is going to be how we address good paying jobs in our country. hardly anybody loses their jobs to immigration, some people through trade but the technology presents a challenge that science has the answer to so i don't know what your organization is but i hope you subscribe to the idea that science is an answer, thank you. >> leader schumer, thank you so much for being here this
afternoon, my name is rogan, i'm from abc news. a question related on the aca. you can't today in hypothetical terms about what might be the replacement for obamacare but you acknowledge the details so my question, is it easier for you as the opposing party to message against a hypothetical that may or may not be in the plan or would you prefer to see the congress revealed the republican plan in order to craft a more specific mention message against parts of the plan you don't like in the second question is, president trump said nobody thought healthcare could be so complicated. i'mwondering if you have a reaction to that in person. >> on the first question, we haven't seen the plan, we've seen a bunch of proposed plans . paul ryan has a plan and tom price has a proud man. a bunch of other republicans had a plan in an attempt to
win democrats over. susan collins and senator cassidy of louisiana put together a plan. one thing they all share is that every single one of those plans would cost the average american more and give them less healthcare. so that's an easy thing to talk about even before we see a specific plan. obviously, there's a 180 degree reversal from the president, paul ryan and mitch mcconnell support plan which are the kind of things that leader pelosi outlined a few moments ago would be a different storybut chances of that happening are minimal so we are busy talking about the broad , in broad strokes what they talked about but i'll give you another one. they come up with a new tax. even aimed at more people then the very unpopular cadillac tax was. if that's in their plan, of course we're goingto have , were going to spend a lot of time opposing it.
that would describe our state of emotion. were going to spend a lot of time telling the american people how bad that would be for them, for working people. so i think that we are being quite successful in pushing back on what the general outlines of their plan would do now and once they come up with this specific plan, we will have even more ammunition. >> recognizing that medicare and medicaid are wedded now to the affordable care act, what they're saying is they want a block grant and change how medicaid is distributed in our country, very very jan damaging to medicaid and the people it served and that medicaid should wither on the vine and you can look at some of their statements in that regard. public sentiment is everything. last week we had over 100 town halls and roundtables,
all kinds of events around the country. people came out spontaneously, organically against it. against what the republicans are doing. what they had succeeded in doing is instilling fear. somebody said at the end, the president said he didn't know it was so complicated. [inaudible] nobody knew. number he didn't know. let me say earlier, a distinguished leader reference something about going into a diner which i think is a yogi berra story so i will tell another yogi berra story. when he was in school, he got a bad report card. it had to be signed by both parents, do any of you remember that? it was signed by both parents and the father said yogi, don't you know anything? and he said i don't even suspect anything. that reminds me of this. thank you. chelsea, i'm the
congressional correspondent for the hispanic outlook but also i represent my good with these reporters so onto another complicated subject which is immigration. senator schumer, nine years ago when you took over the subcommittee with senator kennedy you said a compelling thing, you said most americans are very immigrant but they are against illegal immigration. i wonder if you think that attitude has completely changed and if you think it's right for cities to protect illegal immigrants who have been convicted of felonies and have a deportation order. if you think that's right i agree with president obama. if you've committed a serious crime, you should not be in this country if you are an illegal immigrant and if you are a non-illegal immigrants, you should be process. where we run into problems is that the new order that the president trump seems to put out doesn't make that distinguishing feature. simply crossing the border is
not the kind of crime we're talking about. and in fact, in the comprehensive solution to this is the same solution we had three or four years ago, which is a comprehensive immigration reform bill that senator mccain and i put together, it's bipartisan. it was passed by a large margin in the senate, 68 votes. it had a lot of democrats and a lot of republican votes. much tougher on the border than the wall. it does deal with your illegal immigration. and we think a fair-minded way which is putting the onus on the employer and it provides a fair but very difficult path to citizenship for the 11 million people who are here. that is the solution. no ones come up with a better solution and while right now, the mood in this white house
seems to be virulently anti-immigrant, that's not where the american people are at. the american people believe that what donald trump would like us to believe, that immigrants are all terrorists and criminals. when they are really a future and a hope of america and most americans will get the polling data,anyone i talked to believes .>> cities are not as the representative, sanctuary cities in california, you characterize that cities should be convicted protecting convicted felons. that's not what it's about. let me say this about president trump and immigration, it's a complete departure from decades of democratic and republican presidents having respect for what immigration, the constant reinvigoration of america. hopes, dreams, aspirations, coming to america to make the future better, making america
more american in that optimism. president bush thought he could, he's been one of the breast presidents on immigration. he thought we could get the bill passed and you pass one in the senate, the house republicans just would not take it up. let me say this to president trump. president obama had some executive orders where he protected a number of people in our country from deportation. president reagan and george herbert walker bush, president bush, they and the president obama acted when congress refused to act. because we wouldn't take the house, wouldn't take it up. so he asked the president, congress would not act at least the house would not act. in 1986, congress did act. congress did act and passed an immigration bill. president reagan said, you didn't do enough so were going to have the family
fairness decision which protected a higher percentage of people in our country, immigrations in our country than even president obama did. he did that, george herbert walker bush continue that entire percentage of people, family fairness. president clinton continued that, president george w bush, a great president on immigration, he said about the value of immigration to our country. i'm surprised that his own party did not go along with it. president obama, just take president reagan, bush, clinton . w bush, obama and you see a complete departure from the respect for immigrants in our country. immigrants get the job done, that's what they said in hamilton. immigrants get the job done so we really, really have to maybe as i said, i wonder
that our country is so great that it can withstand anybody to be president of the united states. god is always with us so we have to be hopeful and prayerful but maybe god is telling us that we have not done our job completely to rid our country of some of the negative attitudes whether it's zero phobia, anti-immigrant, anti-woman, racist in whatever way and that is part of the task that we have before us because of america's greatness, the way we view the world, how we have been reinvigorated constantly by immigration and how our founders dedicated what they did on the idea that every generation would take responsibility to make the future better for our country and immigration. immigrants follow that american dream to where we are so this is about our values. >> i want to say one more thing about it to which is all but forgotten.
if president trump has his way in this executive order, all those who are here illegally, not just those who commit serious crimes, not just those who might be part of terrorism but the vast majority who just live here and can be part of the american dream, if they are taken out of america, our economy would have a dramatic drop reedit go talk to employers whether they be farmers or storeowners, they would lose the labor force. a hard-working, dedicated labor force. this would have an effect on anybody in our economy if president trump has his way of what he would do. which would be so un-american. so against what's good for the country economically that i hope that some of our republican colleagues in the senate, the same folks who stood up and patted comprehensive immigration reform would join us in
stopping the kinds of things that it seems since the order isn't exactly clear, that it seems he is trying to do. >> before i get to the last question, we have a little tradition that we like to do around here. we come for the collection of coffee pots. thank you leader pelosi and thank you leader schumer. >> to our country in 2017. >> my last question, we spent a lot of this conference talking about the things that you don't get along with in terms of the trump administration and the republican led congress. can you name one thing that you think you probably could accomplish together? >> let me answer that.
when trump first became president and you listen to his campaign, there are things we could come together on. for instance, he campaigned on getting rid of interest. if president trump proposes a stand-alone bill getting rid of carried interests, i would support it. were not going to oppose it because the name trump is on it but what's happened since the day after he was elected , as i mentioned in my talk, he's moved so far to the right and to such an extreme position, it's hard to see what wecould work with him on because he so far away from our values , his caucus as a whole, not nancy enjoyed and so far away from american values, even far away from what mainstream republican values have always been. it would be very difficult. it's up to him. if he gets away from his heart right line and starts maybe entertaining some different types ideas, then maybe it's a possibility but it sure as heck isn't now as far as i see.
>> i associate myself with everything the distinguished leader has said. i'll just say that in 40 days, you heard me say what president obama already accomplished with congress, over 40 days, it's almost difficult. in 40 hours we have x, 40 days in the desert of christ was there, 40 years in the desert that moses was there. 40 is fraught with meaning and has nothing, nothing that we can say so far we have seen some things that we can work with. ideally, it could be something, it's yet to be seen. but in any event, we look forward to seeing what the president has to say tomorrow night. if it's anything like his inaugural address i think it will be a sad evening for our country. i thank you all very much for the cup and for the hospitality, thank you mister president. >> thank you leader pelosi, thank you leader schumer.