tv Democratic Leaders Preview President Trumps Address to Congress CSPAN February 27, 2017 1:59pm-3:19pm EST
even bigger than it was during the 1980s. importantly, in terms of power inside the house in this congress, most racial and gender diversity is concentrated in the democratic party. white men, but not whites, are a minority within the democratic caucus in the house. increased racial and gender diversity enhances representation and deliberation inside the house. just as research shows, that women are more likely to prioritize issues the disproportionately -- you can watch the rest of this event on our website type university of minnesota in the search box c-span.org. this briefing will be available in the video library after the program is over. good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. welcome to the national press club. >> good afternoon. >> good afternoon. i'm jeff baluu the 110th
president of the national press club. pleased to have you all here. nice capacity in the lounge. please don't forget to put your phones on silent or vibrate so they don't disturb the proceedings. you can follow the proceedings today on twitter, on #mpclive. also, if you have a question, i will call -- i will call upon you but you must rise. you must identify yourself. and i will call upon you in addition to the questions i have already, some of which of course have been developing in just the past few hours given the events of earlier today. you noticed that leader pelosi is here -- leader schumer is on his way here and he will join us very shortly, as quickly as the streets can clear for him. but we want to get things started a little bit before --
excuse me -- before we get going. a couple other decor rum items. i understand mostly -- most of us are journalists, but we understand that some of the people here are indeed members of the club, guests of our speakers. we do have a bit of decorum. no applause here during this unless i call for it to introduce, of course, the people i'm speaking with because, you know, we just have to observe what we do here. also, i want to just -- a couple of thank yous. i want to express my thanks to national press club past president jonathan salant who organized today's news maker and i also want to extend a really gracious thank you for our new team of what we reconstituted here at the press club called the headliners team. we used to have several
committees that do the things that we're doing here in terms of bringing speakers before the club. they've now come together under one roof and now -- we have lisa matthews. we have betsy fisher martin, jamie hor row wits and heather weaver have all come together as one team to help bring the best and the brightest news makers here to the national press club in the wake of its wonderful century-plus history. couple of things i wanted to highlight before we get going this evening, tonight here in the fourth estate just down the hall, author phillip green headlines one of our occasional wine dinners called the manhattan project, as in the drink. the author of the manhattan, the first modern cocktail gets going at 6:30 p.m.
p.j. o'rourke returns on march 16th to talk about his latest book. the ceo of pfizer on march 23rd. april 21st, joint chief's chairman general joseph dunford will be joining us. and for details on these and other things, log on to wwww.press.org. a little about the speakers with us currently, when i first got to washington in 1990 she was speaking out on u.s. policy towards china, specifically human rights issues, becoming a go-to expert on the matters. i remember several time mas dam leader when you were also deeply involved in intelligence matters you served on that committee which you still do to this day. nancy pelosi is the baltimore born daughter of a congressman and sister to charmed city major. she took her talents out west
and decided much later to follow in her father's and brother's political footsteps starting in the late '70s and being elected to the house of representatives in 1987. but don't let the late start fool you because she made up for it in historic fashion, rising to become the first woman to hold the gavel as speaker of the house in 2006. she became a friendly thorn in the side of president george w. bush on his iraq war policy but had to find a way to work with him on rescuing the u.s. economy from economic collapse of 2008 and 2009. along the way, navigating what has become an increasingly partisan house while
trying to win the day for her side of the aisle, even surviving the occasional challenge for leadership. ladies and gentlemen, please give a welcome to democratic leader, nancy pelosi. [ applause ]. >> thank you very much, jeff.
thank you and congratulations to you for your election as president of the 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 be here momentarily. the newly-elected leader of the senate democrats and newly elected -- re-elected 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'll tell him i said that, right, when he gets here? so tomorrow is 40 days into the new administration. president trump will deliver his address, his first address to a joint session of congress. as we have 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 facts.
and the facts are these -- on january 20th, 2009, in the middle of the worst economic catastrophe since the great depression, president obama in 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 the american recovery and reinvestment act. one week after that, the senate passed the bill and on february 17th, president obama signed it into law, four weeks from his inauguration. he had already signed fair pay act and children's health insurance program and made other progress as well, four weeks into his administration. by the time a few days later, february 24th, when he made his first address to a joint session of congress, he could report on
what he had asked for in his inauguration what he had already accomplished. creating or saving 4 million jobs and so much else. we're not allowed to applaud here, chuck, but if we did, we would be allow to applaud for you right now. welcome. i talked about you already. but at that joint address, president obama could report on his toric progress made, 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. he has tried to make america sick again. he has instilled fear in
communities 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, the republican congress and trump administration moved quickly to enable profiteering by wall street -- his wall street friends at the expense of hard-working americans. just two weeks into his administration, president trump acted to unravel dodd-frank reforms, putting main street back at the mercy of wall street. on the same day, he eliminated the rule that financial advisers act in the best interest of their clients and house republicans have also made it harder for 60 million americans to save for retirement. these actions will worsen the conditions that fueled 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 had transformational success in expanding coverage, improving benefits and lowering cost. it extended the life of the medicare trust fund, lowered prescription drug cost for seniors and provided free preventive care, keeping seniors healthier. it also expanded medicaid. now a vital tool in the fight against the opioid epidemic and major funder of seniors in nursing homes or even who go there for day care.
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 the pre-existing medical condition are now protected from life time 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. in their plan, republicans -- picture this, 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 force tens of millions of america's middle class families to pay a massive new tax on employer provided health coverage. maybe that affects you. again, instead of acting on jobs, the trump administration has prioritized a brutal agenda to target vulnerable populations and instill fear. the president's muslim and refugee ban dishonors our values, violates our constitution and undermines our nation's fight against terror. he launched a cruel deportation dragnet that will tear families apart and has hauled law-abiding immigrants out of church alters, courtrooms and schools. and just last week, president trump dealt a heart breaking blow to transgender children in our schools.
a struggling group of lgbt young people who are the most at risk. and all of this to deflect attention away from his failure to advance a job's agenda and 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 nirs month of the trump white house, we saw the resignation of the national security adviser and we saw the chief of staff pressure the fbi over investigations into a connections between the senior trump officials and the russians. the american people deserve the truth. what do 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 start treaty. praise putin and stone wall any investigation to bring the truth to life, including releasing his tax returns. when the president talks about a mess, he's talking about his own first 40 days in office, which he utterly squandered. democrats belief that we must focus everyday on job creation and growing paycheck for everyone everywhere in our country. we should be creating jobs, rebuilding america's infrastructure, investing in science, education, innovation that will drive the jobs of the future and unleash the full potential of your country. five weeks ago we had a peaceful transfer of power, the
inauguration of a new president. although when 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 in their families marched for our values in harmony and with good spirit. it was organic, it was personal, it was powerful. the women, men and children who poured into the streets for the women's march, those who turned out at airports shortly thereafter and 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 essentials of a democracy. calling the press the enemy of the people is a cause for great alarm. and just one reason for the american 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, in the districts across america, democrats will lead the fight against president trump's dangerous bait and switch deflector in chief agenda. it's now my honor to present this senate leader chuck schumer. i said earlier he comes as a new leader with the full confidence of his senate caucus and the overwhelming support of his constituents in new york and he is leading
the charge against the trump agenda in the senate. senator schumer. >> thank you, nancy. >> they're not allowed to applaud. >> that's okay. it's 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 hoetsing us this afternoon. now, before i get into tomorrow's speech, i want to briefly take a step back and take a look at the first month of the trump presidency and how democrats in the senate stood up to the president. after the election, we democrats were down in the dumps. republicans turned majorities to both houses of congress and prepared for the first republican president in eight years. my daughters came to me. they were as upset as i was election night. and i taught them the old song. momma said there would be days like this, there would be days like this my momma said. but a few days after the election i realized that had te election gone the other way and hillary been president and i been majority leader, i certainly would have had more
fun. and leader pelosi and i probably would have been able to get more good things done, which is why we're here. but i realize 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 than 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 pundits were wondering if democrats would stay united over the aca act. republicans were convinced they could bring some 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 plans. we have shown a united front while the republican warfare has been on full display. they can't agree on a time line to repeal the aca. they can't agree what to replace it with or even if they should call it repeal and replace anymore. who would have 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 their party will grow as republicans return 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 president's cabinet is secondary where
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 lock step. 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 23rd. that quite didn't happen. and what we've done is our second point and the most important point. we've exposed the cabinet for what it is. a swamp cabinet, a billionaires and bankers who lack basic confidence, whose views are a bestral of what donald trump promised in the campaign. so we achieved our goal. and it will have good effect on democrats and more importantly on america in the coming months.
when hh secretary price tries to cut medicare and medicaid, the public knows his record and will be on his case about it. when betsy devos tried 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 puster. 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 senate, in the first month, democrats are united and are on offense. republicans are divided on defense. we're doing a lot better than we
thought. next, president's 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 fore sake his promises to the working class. favoring the interests of 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, gee, 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're the greatest thing ever
done. jobs continue to leave america despite the president's boasts. the president is very proud of keeping one half of one carrier plant here in the united states while even a carrier 1,300 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 the day president trump took office. leader mcconnell said during the election, before the 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 opposed tpp in the house and 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'll be a president of great impact. thus far he's demonstrated himself to be a president of little impact. and all too often the little he's 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. he's already trying to roll back wall street reform. despite saying during the campaign he was going to stick up for the working man against wall street, total 180 degree
reversal. he broke his promise to working americans when as 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 when he halted implementation of a rule that would have better protected retirement savings of working people from abusive practices, helping the financiers, hurting the working people, when millions of americans, middle class americans who worked hard, were due a long awaited bump in 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 his campaign i heard him, he said he's going to label china
currency manipulator on day one. now they're backing off. he broke his promise to working americans, went 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 6 have been kept and 45 have no action taken whatsoever. so just to repeat, the first month of a trump presidentsy is less bang, less of a bang and more of a whimper. not much impact. but what he's 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 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's actions, rather than his empty words because as we've seen, the things he talks about usually don't happen. so tomorrow is past is prologue, the president will use populist rhetoric in his speech but he won't back it up with real actions. he'll talk like he favors the working people, but his actions will dessert them. he will govern from the hard right. in that respect, president
trump's address to congress is far less important than past presidential addresses because his speeches don't indicate what he's actually going to do. the matter of real importance is how the president will govern. will he govern like his campaign against both establishments, democrat and republican? or will he govern from the hard right, like his vice president and cabinet want him to do? his speech tomorrow will mean nothing the very instant after it's delivered unless he backs up his words of loyalty to working families with real actions. his speech tomorrow will mean nothing if he and his cabinet of billionaires and bankers who continue to govern from the hard, hard 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's 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. >> thank you, leader schumer. just a couple questions before we throw 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're 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?
>> 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. the director of the office of management and budget has been a person who even today said even though they don't indicate in this whether they would be cutting medicare, social security and the rest, that's not off the table. can't hear? while we haven't seen all the particulars of the budget and just put it in this frame, 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's 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. high concentration on tens 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 in the education of our children, the 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 his director of onb who today said cuts in medicaid and medicare and entitlements are not off the table. remember, this is a republican party trickle down economics. tax cuts for the rich, and if it trickles down to jobs, that would be great. if it doesn't, so be it. that's the free market. we're talking about a trickle up, invest in education and the rest and budget show our values there and build the strength of our country in both ways,
military, might and strength of the american people. what they will do, in order to not increase the deficit, we will have perhaps a 10% cut across the board. we don't know yet where they're getting that over $50 billion cut, but it would cut nih by $3.2 billion, which would -- we would lose 1,000 grants to medical researchers. the biblical power to cure curtailed where there's scientific opportunity, we have 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. we don't know what that is. but we do know about their director of onb is that he led the charge to shut down government and he voted against opening up government a few
years ago. and that was house republican budget number he 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 any cuts or increases had to be shared equally between the domestic investments that we 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, but this is a really bad path that we have seen so far. i don't even know -- i don't even know if the president really understands the ramifications of the cuts that are being proposed.
with that i yield to the distinguished senator. >> nancy sums up basically what
i think, too, which is -- stand by your mike. 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're going to almost certainly by what they've said breathe dirtier air and drink dirtier water, even after we had flint. they are almost certainly going to be much less protected against financial repay shous agencies that try to take advantage of them. the budget proposal is a reflection of where the president is at and who he is, today's hard right republican party which has done this budget through its cabinet believes in,
which is relieve the burdens on the wealthy and special interests, whether they be coal 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 followup. there's a question just pure numbers in the house and the senate. don't they basically have the votes to carry out what they want to do, just like they have their cabinet and now this budget blueprint? >> well, that's what everyone said about aca and the fact that they're governing from the hard right makes it a lot harder for them to even get a full compliment of republicans, even using reconciliation they would -- if they lose three republicans, they don't get their budget. and we don't know where these cuts are yet, but given their
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. it's very much about the opioid epidemic and rehab that govern cay sick 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 house or senate than the voice of their constituents. wouldn't you say, senator shumer? >> yes, i would. >> yesterday on russia, you remember talking about wanting to have an investigation into contacts between the incoming trump administration and those agents of russia. the house intelligence chairman gave a press conference earlier today saying that the intelligence community told him that there's basically nothing there yet, that he knows of.
how do you respond to that? >> let me just say if hillary clinton had won the election, i still think we should have had an investigation as to the russian disruption of our election. it's about our democracy. and it's about russians who are 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, his businesses to the russians. it's very important for the american people to know the truth. why else would he be putting putin on a pedestal, flirting with lifting the sanctions as i mentioned earlier with russia for their aggression into eastern europe? why would he be undermining the start treaty? what is this about? something is strange about this.
now as far as the chairman of the committee saying what he said. first of all, if 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 he can't possibly know what he is talking about. this is called stone walling. what are the republicans in congress afraid of? that they would not have an independent commission to take this away from the congress or an investigation themselves to say we haven't looked into it, but we know there's nothing there. please. it's just ridiculous. i don't know if -- i know that the house and senate intelligence committees are trying to work in a by partisan way and i think we should give them time to be able to do that, but the statement made by chairman nunez today that really raises serious questions about stone walling in my view, and i have a long experience in intelligence. it is -- we can do it all.
congress can play its role. the outside can play its role. just show us the facts. tell us the truth. tell the american people the truth and that's why they're attacking you. press is the enemy of the american people. >> lindsey has the mike with her hand up. identify yourself and where you're from, please. >> thank you. adam from the st. louis post dispatch. during the campaign, president trump said he was the law and order candidate and he said police needed the freedom to be tougher on crime and attorney general has molded himself in the same fashion. now that we're coming out of an administration that has embraced police oversight and police reform, how far
do you think the pendulum will swing in the other direction, and what do you plan to do about that? thank you. >> well, one of the things we had hoped 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 so, if the justice department veers off track here, we will certainly do everything we can to call them out for it. i don't know anything they have done yet in this regard, so 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. >> jeff, thanks. bob wiener. club member, op-ed writer and mainstream radio network and leader schumer, pelosi, thank you so much for coming to the press club. health and infrastructure, on health care, do you really think there will be no vote for repeal, no loss of recipients, no loss of provisions will they do what pence and trump said that they'll pass repeal and have the rudiments of health
care and then after a while be able to get to something else so they do tax breaks for future people and keep existing recipients under obama care? and on infrastructure, do you think 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 first since we democrats in the senate have come out with an infrastructure plan. if it's tax breaks, we're not going to be for it. a, 82 cents of every dollar would go to the people who finance the roads and bridges and water and sewor. it would create tremendous amounts of tolls all over the place where they wouldn't be now because this is -- these will going to be loans from private sector people. finally, it won't build things in large places, large parts of america, particularly rural america. i told the president that's a
non-starter. we believe both nancy and i and 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 as always been. not cutting other programs, not using these tax breaks but do it. on aca, they're in a total pickle. their hard right freedom caucus says we want to repeal but we don't want to put anymore money into this. 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, the leader said about infrastructu infrastructure. they come up with something we can work together on because infrastructure for a long time had barely been a very nonpartisan issue.
we always worked together on it. wasn't until president obama proposed something on infrastrature the republicans resisted and we had to make the initiative smaller. if it's a real infrastructure bill with investments let's talk. if it's a tax bill disguised as infrastructure bill that's not going to happen. as the senator said, you have the taxpayer fundings the tax breaks for somebody to build it is going to turn around and charge the consumer tolls. that's not going to happen. let's hope it isn't so. but also recognize a necessity of having an infrastructure bill, probably 3 trillion dollars at least in deficit in our country according to the american society of civil engineers and we have to not only as the president has talked about transportation, that's important. but we have to do as the senate bill doesn't, we would support issues that relate to water,
broad band, 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 broad band. your question on health care is indicative of the fact that they don't know what they're doing. it's hard to formulate a question. but from what we have seen so far, 10, perhaps 20 but i'm speaking on the most defensible number for the little bit that we have seen, at least 10 million people will lose their coverage. could be 20. and this president has said not one person would lose coverage. so it's not only losing coverage, it's losing coverage. it's reduced benefits. it's increasing cost. 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
yelt. >> hi, ashley kellogg, cnn. going back to russia, senator schumer, do you think the investigation by the senate intelligence committee has been compromised because of chairman burrs contacts with the white house? >> i was very disappointed in chairman burrs contacts when the administration asked him to contact news organizations. it certainly gives the appearance of lack of impartiality. i have spoken with senator warner, our ranking democrat on that committee, the democrats are united in demanding that the senator give a complete, full investigation without bias, without compromise and just go to the facts wherever they lead. they have put the senator on notice if they're not getting that they will then ask for a different type of situation to
come about, whether it's a select committee or something like that. and we've now heard, as i understand it, two republicans have been critical of what senator burr has done in statements. i heard that just within the last few hours. so senator burr son notice. because what he did was wrong and this is not the way to conduct a fair, impartial investigation that goes wherever the facts lead. >> good afternoon. i understand that you say the defense budget hike is coming at the expense of domestic spending on social services. how important is it for the defense budget to be hiked? what sort of priority do you think defense should take under this administration? thanks. >> we all want a strong defense and i know some people like john mccain feel it needs to be hiked. i would before commenting on
that would look at where they're hiking it and how they're 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, you know, increase defense by such a large amount and then cut the very programs that help middle class americans keep jobs get jobs, live better lives seems to be totally wrong and out of whack. >> in order to make a judgment about an increase in defense, you have to hear 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 about our national security which is what we take an oath of office is to protect and defend, people, the constitution, the constitution, it has to be -- that doesn't -- defense budget does not include homeland
security. it doesn't include the state department and the soft security issues, diplomacy and the rest. it doesn't 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, veterans, homeland security, et cetera. >> leader schumer, you voted for -- i'm sorry. sam from ipa media. you voted for the 2002 iraq war resolution claiming iraq was vigorously pursuing nuclear weapons. do you acknowledge that israel has nuclear weapons? if i could, too, leader pelosi,
you said there are no grounds for impeachment against donald trump. but legal scholars from katherine ross, to lauren transcribe at harvard say there is. lauren transcribe said congress cannot give consent to a president's violation of the domestic clause. are you not giving such consent? >> the case is being made about the immoll yumts and you have to have evidence and the rest, but the case has not fully been made. the fact is that when i was speaker after we won in '06 -- in '07 people wanted me to impeach president bush because the war in iraq. i'm never recovered with the left on this subject for not impeaching president war because of the war in iraq. you don't impeach somebody because you don't like their policies. when they break the law, that's when you have grounds for impeachment. and at the time of the war i
said as a 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 misrepresenting the american people could be cause for impeachment. if so, there's plenty of grounds right now with the current president, but it just isn't 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're trying to unit the country. many of the president's supporters are just not ready to accept the fact that their judgment might not have been so great in voting for him and by the time the case is made perhaps they'll be ready to accept that. it's very hard, impeachment. it's very hard. >> i didn't catch your question.
>> i'm not -- you can go read the newspapers about that. >> you can't acknowledge israel has nuclear weapons? >> 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. >> you've talked about working families. i'm jamie on the headliners committee. and we had senator man chen, representative mckinly 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 has been extended. president trump in the campaign says he digs coal, but what about these retirees in coal countries? >> our democratic caucus from
one end to the other is united with you. we had made it is a condition to move forward at the end of last year that the miners be at least not let their health benefits expire so they've been renewed to the next budget of april 28th. senator manchen, been our leader on this, is proposing that we move forward in a new way, which you'll hear from in the next day or two from him if he hasn't made that public yet. but we have not -- 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 the bill that passed in the finance committee which made this permanent both health and pension side get done. and as i said, tomorrow you'll hear a little more about that. >> earlier our distinguished president mentioned 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 carved figure of a coal miner. he was from baltimore, maryland. a carve figure, he was very close to jennings randolph, you know, west virginia. and so that is in my office, that coal miner. while i think that coal degrades the environment and we have to move off it and i've been a staunch supporter of doing that, we have an obligation and responsibility to these coal miners, some of them could be visiting us this week, the coal miners and their widows. all these people go around talking about coal this, coal that, king coal the rest of it that they cannot honor the commitment that has been made to these workers is just something so shameful and hypocritical and inconsistent and that's why i voted against the bill because it did not put in there we b
negotiate -- we tried everything. we tried to leverage everything we had to try to get them to be taken care of. these are coal miners, widows, orphans and republicans wouldn't do it. singing the praises of king coal, ignoring the needs of coal miners, it's shameful. >> one other thing i would say, president trump admitted privately he wants to get it done. let him step up to the plate and tell the republicans in the house and senator, particularly leaders mcconnell, this has to get done and has to get done now. he speaks for the coal miners. it's like the little remarks i gave. he gives a good speech about the coal miners and does nothing to help them and lets the right wing congress do nothing. >> one other here and come back to this side. >> hi, eric with the fiscal times. getting back to the aca repeal
and replace, senator schumer, if you -- if push comes to shove, do you think there are three republicans in the senator 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, some of the republican senators feel very strongly about knocking out planned parenthood, which aassume they would do in their proposal. many of our republicans senators who come from states that have gotten good benefits from medicaid that has given health insurance don't want to see those repealed. so if the provisions are the ones that we've heard about, you know, very close to the ryan plan, i think it may be very difficult for them to get 51 votes in the senator.
>> if i just may add to that the following, governs are hear this week talking to them about expansion medicaid which is in 31 states, millions of people receiving coverage who would lose it. i don't want to be the ones to break the news to you, the republicans don't care about those 20 million who will lose the benefits. they care about the 155 million who will lose their benefits, pay more for less and they view that as their constituency. so what are they going to do to protect them? they 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. don't underestimate the power of medicaid and a number of republican governs have voted to expand it. you heard the comments of govern kasich, but there are others who i won't use their names right
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 lady right behind. >> women, women. >> i agree. >> thank you. my name is herman i'm the executive director for the national association for objectivity and 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 reporting 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 have some reason to be concerned about the press? >> every one of us 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's 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're lying. it's fake news. you're un-american, all of that. that is fundamentally not what a president should do. i don't know of a single plt who has done that the way he has. and it is fundamentally against the core of democracy. because there aren't too many checks on a president. our founding fathers were worried. they set up a system of checks and balances. but freedom of the press in the first amendment, the now fourth estate, was one of the greatest checks on the president.
and this president, instead of trying to answer legitimate criticisms, seems to want to take a 2 x 4 to the press and frighten them. i hope you won't be frightened. >> something else you said, mr. bowman did you say? from science -- well, here is the thing i want to pick up on what you said because i completely agree with what the distinguished senator leader has said in terms of the press. if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. it's just the way it is. you put yourself on the line. people agree, disagree, none of us is pleased with the press that we receive, i think. but that doesn't mean we say that this is not the champion. the champion of our democracy, protecting our democracy, freedom of the press, the first amendment. and as much as i don't like the coverage, i respect the power of
the press to protect. as president bush -- george w. bush said earlier today, we go to other countries, urging leaders to have freedom of the press in their country and then we denounce the press in our own country. it's not a good thing. but you mention the word science, we have a couple more questions, but i want to take the opportunity to say this -- i have said from time to time that i have three or four answers to all of our problems. science, science, science and science. science whether it's about our good health. science whether it's our competitiveness in business and in our economy. science to invest to protect our country. science to again protect this planet which is god's creation. when my republican colleagues say to me, faith or science, take your pick. i say science is an answer to our prayers. that's why some of the
evangelicals join us in our protection of the planet because they believe, as do i, this is god's creation and we have a moral responsibility to protect it. so whether it's our health, our national security, the air our children breathe, or our economy, science, science, science and science. that's why i hope tomorrow we would hear from the president, a presentation about what he would do in light of innovation and the rapid pace of innovation that president obama referenced in one of his lass press conferences or last speeches that innovation is moving so rapidly. that is going to be how we address good paying jobs in our country. hardly anybody loses their jobs. some people through trade. but technology presents a challenge that science has the answer to, so i don't know what your organization is but i hope you scribe to the idea of that science is an answer. thank you. >> leader schumer, leader
pelosi, thank you so much for being here this afternoon. my name is ally rogen. i cover capitol hill for abc news. i have two questions related on the aca. you talked a lot today in hypothetical terms about what might be in the republican plan to repeal and replace obama care, but you acknowledge you haven't seen the details. my question is, is it easier for you as the opposing party to message against the hypotheticals that may or may not be in the plan or would you prefer to see the concrete details of the republican plan in order to craft a more specific message against parts of the plan that you don't like? and the second question is today president trump said nobody thought health care could be so complicated. and i'm wondering if you have a reaction to that assertion. >> he didn't. on the first question, we haven't seen the plan, we have seen a bunch of proposed plans. paul ryan has a plan and tom price has a plan. 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. the one thing they all share is that every single one of those plans would cost the average american more and give them less health care. so that's an easy thing to talk about even before we see a specific plan. obviously if there's 180 degree reversal and the president paul ryan and mitch mcconnell support a plan that would do the things leader pelosi outlined a few minutes ago would be a different story. the chances of that happening are minimal. we are busy talking about the broad in broad stroke what they've talked about, but i'll give you another one. they come up with a new tax. it's aimed at more people than the very unpopular cadillac tax is. if that's in their plan, of course we're going to have -- we're going to spend a lot of
time -- i wouldn't want to describe our state of emotion. we're going to spend a lot of time telling the american people how bad that would be 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 a specific plan we'll have even more ammunition. >> just in addition to that, recognizing that medicare and medicaid are wedded now to the affordable care act. what they're saying is they want to block grant and change how medicaid is distributed in our country very, very damaging to medicare and the people it serves. and that medicare should wither on the vine. and you can just look at some of their statements in that regard. public sentiment is everything. last week we had over 100 town halls, round tables, all kinds of events across the country. people came out spontaneously,
organically against what the republicans are doing. what they have succeeded in doing is instilling fear. now, something you said at the end, you said that president today said he didn't know it could be so complicated. [ inaudible ]. >> nobody knew. nobody knew. no. no. he didn't know. but let me just say earlier that distinguished leader referenced something about going into a diner which i think is a yogi berra story. i'll tell you another yogi berra story. when he was in grade school he got a bad report card that had to be signed by both parents. do any of you remember that? no, you never had a bad report card. mother was gentle. the father said, yogi, don't you know anything? he said i don't even suspect anything. that reminds me of this president of the united states. >> thank you.
i'm the congressional correspondent for the hispanic outlook but also i cover my hood, the georgetowner. i'm a reporter. so on to another complicated subject, which is immigration. senator schumer nine years ago when you took over the judiciary sub committee for senator kennedy, you said a very compelling thing. you said most americans are very pro-immigrant, but they are against illegal immigration. >> yes. >> i wonder if you think that that attitude has completely changed and if you think it's right for cities to protect illegal immigrants who have been convicted of felonyings and have a deportation order if you think that's right? >> okay. i think -- look, i agree with president obama. if you've committed a serious crime, you should not be in this country if you're an illegal immigrant and if you're not, you should be punished. where we run into problems is that the new order that the president -- 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. in fact, in the solution to this is the same solution that we had three, four years ago. which is the comprehensive immigration reform bill senator mccain and i put together, it was bipartisan, it was passed by a large margin in the senate, 68 votes, got a lot of democrat and lot of republican votes. it's much tougher on the border than the wall. it does deal with future illegal immigration and we think in a fair-minded way, which is putting the own us on the employers and it provides a fair but very difficult pass to citizenship for the 11 million people who are here. that is the solution. no one has come up with a better solution. while right now the mood in this
white house seems to be anti-immigrant, that's not where the american people are at. the american people believe that -- 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 look at the polling data, anyone i talked to believe that. >> cities are not -- i represent a sanctuary of cities, city of san francisco, you characterize a city should be protecting convicted felon. of course not. that's not what it's about. let me just say this about president trump and immigration. it is a complete departure from decades of democratic and republican presidents being -- having respect for what immigration, the constant reenvision ration of america, hopes, dreams, aspirations, courage, coming to america to make the future better for their families. making america more american in that optimism. president bush really thought
that he could -- president george w. bush was one of the best presidents on immigration. he thought we could get the bill passed. you passed one in the senate in president obama. the house republicans just would not take it up. let me just 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, they -- and president obama acted when congress refused to act. because we wouldn't take the house republicans wouldn't take it up. so he acted when congress would not act at least the house would not act. in 1986, congress did act. congress did act and passed an immigration bill. and president reagan said, you didn't do enough. so we're going to have the
family fairness provisions, which protected a higher percentage of people in our country, immigrants in our country, than even president barack obama did. he did that and president george herbert walker bush did that. family fairness, higher percentage of people. president clinton continued that. president george w. bush, a great president on immigration, words he said about the value of the immigration to our country. surprise that his own party did not go along with it. president obama. so take just reagan, clinton, george herbert walker bush, w. bush, obama and you see a complete departure respect from immigrants in our country. immigrants get the job done. that's what they say in "hamilton." we have to really, really, have
to maybe as a person of faith, i wonder our country is so great that it can with stand 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 anti-immigrant, anti-woman, racist in whatever way and that is part of the task that we have before us because america's greatness, the way we are viewed in the world, how we have again been reinvigorated constantly by immigration and how our founders predicated what they did on the idea that every generation would take responsibility to make the future better for our country and immigrants followed that american dream to where we are. so, this is about our values. >> i just want to say one more thing about it, too, which is
often forgotten. if president trump has his way in his executive order just says 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, vast, vast majority who want to live here and be part of the american dream, if they are all to be taken out of america, our economy would have a dramatic, dramatic drop. go talk to employees, whether they be farmers or manufacturers or store owners, they would lose the labor force, hard-working, dedicated labor force. so this is going to have affects on everything. and our whole economy if president trump has this way of his way of what he would do which would be so un-american and 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
passed 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 national press club tradition that we always like to do around here. >> that's why we come. >> you come for the collection of coffee mugs. >> and thank you, leader pelosi. and thank you, senator leader schumer. >> to our country in 2017. >> here here. >> my last question, we spent a lot of this conference talking about the things 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? >> you know, let me answer that. when trump first became president and you listened to his campaign, there were somethings we could come together on.
for instance, he campaigned on getting rid of carried interest. tomorrow if president trump proposes a stand alone bill getting rid of carried interest, nancy and i would support it. we're not going to oppose it just because the name trump son it. but what's happened since the day after he was elected, as i mentioned in my talk a little bit, he moved so far to the right and such an extreme position, it's hard to see what we could work with him on because he's so far away from our values and that's speaking caucuses as a whole, not nancy and chuck, and so far away from american values even far away from what mainstream republican values have always been. it's going to be very difficult. it's up to him. if he gets away from his hard right line and starts maybe entertaining some different type ideas, then maybe it's a possibility, but it sure as heck isn't now as far as i see it. >> nancy pelosi? >> well, i associate myself with
everything that the distinguished leader has said. i will just say in 40 days, i mean, you heard me say what president obama already accomplished working with congress, 40 days, is almost biblical, 40 hours we as catholics observe, 40 days in the dessert that christ was there, 40 years in the desert moses was there, 40 is fraught with meaning. so far we have seen some things that we can work with. ideally could there 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. let's be hopeful. i thank all for the cup and the hospitality. thank you, mr. president. >> thank you, leader pelosi. thank you, leader schumer. log on to www.press.org.
budget officials briefed reporters on the plan this morning, president trump publicly explained including boosts to the military, border patrol and cutting domestic programs and foreign aid. quote, this budget follows through on my promise of keeping america safe, keeping out terrorists, putting violent offenders behind bars or removing them from our country all together. he said. still to come live at 3:30 p.m. eastern today, hearing on efforts to stop drugs from being stolen or otherwise diverted from v.a. facilities. officials fear opioid addicted veterans are responsible for that. ahead of that, trump's presidency and the press. jeff mags is roiter's white house correspondent as well as president of the white house correspondent's association joining us after president trump announced this weekend that he won't attend this year's white house correspondents dinner. jeff