tv Newsmakers Rep. Jim Jordan CSPAN June 8, 2018 10:01pm-10:33pm EDT
princeton university professor julian on the growth of u.s. foreignover policy in the 1970's. sunday at 2:30 p.m. eastern, jill nordgren and her book "stories from churl raising women lawyer -- trailblazing women lawyers." watch c-span, this weekend. guest thismakers week's ohio congressman jim jordan. >> we are all interested in what the going forward is. what do you see happening over the next couple of days? what wee focused on
told the american people we were going to do, what they elected us to do, what we promised, which is billed the border security while, in chain migration, stopped the visa lottery system, reform our asylum laws, deal with century city laws -- sanctuary city laws, after that then we can deal with the daca situation. we have to address those individuals in a way that is consistent with the rule of law that doesn't give them a unique path to citizenship. they have to get in line like everybody else, they can't jump in line, that to us is fundamental. that's the legislation we are pushing forward. that mirrors closely the bill that the chairman of the judiciary committee introduced and we supported for a long time. potentiallyys, hours away from the discharge position -- petition of reaching enough signatures. what does that mean for the
house republican conference? >> that means there will be four bills on the floor. the likely outcome will be a bill that a handful of republican support, along with all the democrats. that is not the outcome that was the mandate of the 2016 election. what he means for leadership, for all of the inside baseball game in washington, i am not focused on that. what i am focused on doing is what we told the people we are going to do. that outcome will likely be something contrary to the mandate of the election. that is what i am concerned about, that is what we are trying to stop and make a good bill to get republicans to support that the president is supportive of and what the people sent us here to do. >> is there anything majority leader maccarthy or with scully's could have done to p scalise- are witwhi
to get it done? was in the same kind of effort we saw on tax reform. effort we sawsame on the first obamacare repeal legislation that the leader for introduced -- leadership introduced. i would like to see the same intensity and effort from our leadership on this bill, which is as big as issue in the campaign as tax reform and tax cuts were. that's the frustration from all sides. where was the intensity to get a resolution to a critical issue, an issue that helped make president trump a nominee for the republican party and helped him become president? that is a frustration from both moderates and conservatives. it does sound like, from some of these negotiations, that
freedom caucus members are open to some sort of eventual path to citizenship for these dreamers. is that accurate? >> what we are not in favor of is a special path. what we are in favor of is doing border security, all of those things i listed the election was about. we are supportive of the same thing the president is supportive of grade once we do border security and immigration reform, secure our southern border, make our immigration better, then we are in favor of allowing the daca population to stay here. they do not get unique path, they stay in line and, pursuant like anybody else who came here legally. speaker ryan talked about drafting legislation about the four pillars of the president. do you think you can get 218 republican votes to pass that? >> we will see. that's why we are having the
negotiations. i think that remains to be seen. the closer it is -- chairman good let's legislation is much closer to the weight of the conference, where republican members and house representatives are, then any of the other legislation being talked about. that's where the people are, that's where the conference is. i think there needs to be a more intense effort on getting support for the bill. the closer we can get, the better chance we have at 218. if we get farther from the legislation, i don't think we will, but we will continue to try. --i would like to talk about you have expressed interest in being open to running for speaker of the house. given that speaker ryan will be retiring at the end of the year. you have received a lot of encouragement from outside groups like the club for growth
and tea party patriots. is there news that you would like to make today? >> no. i've been very clear. i plan on being part of the discussion, but more important than who the speaker is next your, we have to do it this year. we get immigration right, we have to reform welfarem we need to make tax cuts permanent we need to get to the bottom of what the fbi did in the clinton investigation, and as they moved into the trump-russian investigation, all of the wrongdoings that took place. we need to focus on those things. when that happens, the speaker's race will take care of itself. let's stay focused on what the american citizens want. i have been amazed at the support that we have received. just about every major conservative organization endorsed us. we have been encouraged by all of that, but that is down the
road. right now we need to do what we told the people we are going to do and had into the midterm elections to keep the majority. >> a lot of those folks have said in the event republicans lose the house of representatives this november, you would make a great minority leader because you have a ,eputation for being a pit bull attack dog, somebody who could be a good opposition leader. >> i always have a smile on my face. we are not going to go into minority, i think we are going to keep the majority. to make sure we keep the majority we have to focus on the things i just talked about. the simplest way to do that is to stay focused on what the american people elected us to do. business, it never hurts to keep your promise. let's do that. if we do that, i think we will be in the majority. >> we had a recent development
with the justice department announcing it would not defend pieces of the affordable care act, including those that guarantee coverage of pre-existing conditions. do you have any concerns about the decision? >> what i have concerns with is care.st of health it is why we should have repealed obamacare and replaced it with a model that is patient driven, that allows people to have greater access to health savings accounts, one that would bring down the price of insurance for people in the individual and small group market place. that is what i'm in favor have -- favor of. obamacare was a disaster. we should not forget the lies and misstatements that were said by the previous administration. even when the president talked about if you like it you can keep it, if you like your doctor, you can keep it, amy adams are going to decline. remember when he told us the website was secure and would work?
all of the false statements made about obamacare. things i wish the we were able to get done last year. repealed obamacare and replace it with a model that would bring down the cost of insurance and empower patients and health care. that's what we have to focus on. the justice department's decision is understating how bad obamacare legislation is for the american people. >> it's a component of guaranteeing coverage of pre-existing components -- conditions, it is widely popular. it has not become the law of the land to repeal the aca. are you comfortable with going after this component of the law? >> the kind of bill we ultimately supported in the house and sent to the senate is what i'm comfortable with. i am not comfortable with senators voting against the same legislation two years ago they supported. i don't know how they could go back home and face the constituents after doing that.
let's get refocused on repealing obamacare and replacing it with a model that does what the american people sent us here to do. >> there has been other news this morning. it seems like there is always five new stories every new day . president trump tweeted he believes russia should be brought back into the g7 group. is that something you would support? >> i leave that up to our folks in the white house, at the state department, at the treasury department, and what they think is appropriate with how the g7 should work. i will leave it up to them. what i do know is since president trump took office, taxes have been cut, the economy is growing, unemployment is at its lowest in 20 years, he is meeting with north korea next embassies -- the embassy is in his real, the
hostages are home. that is an amazing year. the fact is by anyone's definition, we have had an amazing year point -- 1.5 years. it goes to the credit of the leader of our country and what they are doing. >> there has been celebration of economic decisions and that the trade policies could undermine that. how comfortable are you with the tariffs he has proposed? how would that affect your district? >> i have concerns, i am for going after the biggest problem, which is china. i think the president shares that concern. larry cut low shares the same concern. we want trade agreements that are fair, but we also understand there are a lot of jobs across this great country and in the fourth district of ohio that are there because we can market goods around the planet, we can market and sell goods in all kinds of markets. i do get nervous about the
tariffs on steel and aluminum. in ohio, one of the biggest manufacturing districts of the country, we have a lot of those users who take the products and make other things. i get nervous about that. out, i amwork confident we will get a better nafta agreement and trade policy, but also policy that in thebusiness owners fourth district of ohio and around the country to sell their products in all kinds of markets. >> do you think they should be taking any legislative steps concerning the tariffs? would you support it in the house? >> i would have to see legislation. we have to let the white house continue to do their negotiations. unemployment is the lowest it's been, wages are going up, the economy is growing at a much faster rate than any time over the previous 10 years. things are moving in a good direction. when i talked to family and district owners, they are pretty
pleased with how things are moving. >> what about the farm bill? congressonfident that will be able to tackle the farm bill this year? let's say you don't take any action on immigration. will you then be able to go ahead and pursue the farm bill? >> you need the immigration bill passed -- >> we would prefer a good immigration bill passed before the farm bill. that's the position we took on the farm bill a few weeks ago. if that can't happen, we would prefer a vote on a legislation -- on the legislation itself before the farm bill. i think it will pass, particularly the one we have in the house, which reforms our food stamp program to start the welfare reform this country needs. the immigration issue needs to
be dealt with in some manner before the farm bill should pass. >> if the bill were to receive a vote and failed, would that satisfy you? turn the be able to farm bill and supported -- support it? >> it depends on where the discharge position process is at. weeku said earlier this that it was frustrating to hear fbi,er ryan defend the their decision to use a , somethingl source president trump has referred to as a spy to infiltrate the campaign, in terms of the russia investigation. given the speakers comments, do you have confidence that he is the right leader for your conference ahead of the midterm election? >> here is what i know about that situation. they didn't view any of the
documents, they got a briefing from the same people who have been caught hiding information from congress. there is no nice way to say this. we have cut them redacting information that should not have in redacted. page, theted in a fact that peter struck was friends with one of the judges. it happened to be the same judge who heard michael flynn's case and recused himself after flynn pled guilty. kind of interesting, why would they redacted that -- why would why reject -- read that t would they redacted? because it was embarrassing to the fbi. when you catch them redacting things, when they have subpoenas sent by congress, and when they
took the dossier to the fisa courts and didn't tell two important facts, who pay for? democratic national committee, and christopher steele had been fired for leaking information. you don't go talk to the press that you work with fbi and information you are collecting. yet they used his work product to secure a warrant. that is the backdrop. that is the context. now they come to a briefing and the fbi says trust us. we are not going to show you the documents, you can take our briefing. we will tell you what took place. they say everything is fine. i'm not buying it. i don't think the american people by it. for the speaker of the house and chairman to say it is fine. when you have someone in another country working with the fbi
talking to folks in and around the trunk campaign, that is a spy. is ok because they told us so? the public is in buying that, neither am i. >> are you confident the speaker should remain speaker? one of your colleagues said there are discussions in the capital about whether somebody else should be leading your conference heading into the midterms. >> i am right where i said i was, i am frustrated about that. the speaker said he will stay, that is fine. i think what he said about this doesn't make sense to meet and is not consistent with the history. five of the top people at the fbi have been fired or demoted. when have you seen a federal agency where that took place? comey has been fired, andrew mccabe, fired. slide three times under oath, he now faces a criminal referral. jim bakker was demoted. the fbi counsel to mccabe,
demoted. the head of counterintelligence, demoted. when have you seen that? now we are supposed to see don't worry, we can investigate ourselves, we can give you a briefing, and you can trust us. really? this is why there needs to be a second special counsel. this is why we called for it last summer and are still calling for it. we just introduced a resolution two weeks ago, that's why we need a special counsel, to get to the bottom of this. >> the administration is frustrated with leaks. reporter'seized a telephone information to look through the data. is that something you feel is appropriate? with congress and raskin on -- congressman raskin on sources. we have already introduced the legislation.
he asked me to be a sponsor. when it comes to protecting your first amendment liberties, fourth amendment rights, the rights to free spirit -- free press and free speech, second amendment rights we enjoy, the right to privacy, i am as strong as they get on this issue. i am nervous about the government doing what you described, just like i was nervous about the government, like the irs when they targeted people about their political beliefs. fbi as fired up of what the did in the trump-russia investigation. what it looks like, the fbi did in the investigation. up, you servelow on the oversight committee. you have the oversight subcommittee gavel. do you plan to look into the doj regarding some of its tactics in accessing reporter's emails and phone records? >> we are working on -- we have
amendmentgs on first -- encroachments on first amendment rights, particularly on college campuses. we had been schapiro and adam corolla last year, then we had some great witnesses a few weeks ago, some professors who have been targeted on campuses. this whole idea about safe space and free speech zones. is almost laughable -- it is almost laughable. how close can a safe space be to a free speech zone? can it be the same area? those are the kinds of sin and against going on -- shenanigans going on on college campuses. we need to protect the rights we enjoy under the bill of rights and under the great document of the united states constitution. >> i have a hard-hitting fashion question. you are well known in the capital for not wearing your
jacket, case in point today. your jacket has its own twitter account. how did this become your signature fashion look? >> i am not even sure. i hear about this twitter account, i have never looked at it, but my staff told me it exists. the things are funny on their sometimes. the only time i wear the jacket is when i have to, i wear it on the house floor and when i am around the president. mostly it is because when i am in committee, i get fired up at the witnesses who i don't think are being square with me or my colleagues, more importantly the people. you can't get fired up and into it if you have a jacket slowing you down. i got used to it and i do it all the time now. subject,ore serious this past week, the medicare trustees updated their
projections for the medicare trust fund, now saying her years earlier -- three years earlier. they cannot get congress' attention, nor the administration's. by the time they do, it would be a much more serious problem. this is an area under your purview in congress. what is your reaction? >> it is scary. we have talked long about that. we do have to change our entitlement programs, and do it in a way that protect current people, current recipients, but also in a way that keeps the promise this country has made with its citizens that social security and medicare will be there for younger generations. in order to do that, they will have to change. we can start early. you want to address the problem the earlier you get after it, the easier it is to solve. the longer you wait, the more drastic measures you have to take. we are getting close to where they may have to be drastic
measures. we should avoid that and start addressing it now. i put forth some plans we supported and still think have a lot of merit. we just haven't been able to garner the support in congress to move in that direction. i supported those efforts and continue to, because they were done in a way that protects people at or near retirement age, and changes it for younger americans. i think americans understand that. we should address the debt problem we have, we have a $20 trillion debt right now. this is the kind of thing we are to have to do. the sooner the better. >> how do you see that happening? >> we may have to wait until the next election. at some point, i think we are going to have to have the courage to step forward and do it. we had a chance to make a start on dealing with the spending problem a few weeks ago, when instead of passing this big , we had aending bill
chance to do what we needed to do for the military then hold the line on nondefense discretionary spending. the reason we had a chance to was because chuck schumer shut down the government a few months ago. we passed a short-term spending bill. he said more important than funding the troops and government is amnesty, so he shut down the government. over the weekend the american people said you're crazy. he comes back monday and said i am going to open the government up. that was the backup trade -- that was the backdrop. instead of increasing defense like we told the american people, then holding the line on nondefense and beginning to save money for taxpayers and deal with the deficit and debt problem we have, we passed this omnibus and increased spending on everything and continue the pattern. this pattern was created under
president obama and harry reid, if you get one dollar for defense, they hold up the defense bill until they get an increase in nondefense. we had a chance to win, i think we forfeited our opportunity, which is unfortunate. that is the kind of place we have to start if we are going to address this many issues we have. >> looking ahead to a very big week, the discharge position deadline, and the historic summit with north korea. thank you so much for being here to set the stage on newsmakers. >> let's go back to immigration and the discharge. both of you are following the mechanics. what should our viewers who are not following closely need to know about this process? of it fromkind pockets of negotiation happening. one of the big questions is whether lawmakers will be able to agree on what happens with
the dreamers. these are people in the daca program or may be eligible. whether lawmakers can increase on some kind of path to citizenship. when congressman jordan was talking about no special path to citizenship, that is the crux of the debate. it is unclear if they will be able to agree on some process that conservatives will say is not a special pathway. even if they do agree, that doesn't mean they will be able to pass a bill. those negotiations are happening. centrist republicans and democrats are trying to get 218 signatures to advance this discharge petition. there are all sorts of crazy rules around the petition. the bottom line is if they get enough signatures by tuesday, they can consider it this month and it would trigger a series of votes on immigration polls, including conservative and democratic once.
it is unclear if these will result in the logging past. most think it is unlikely. thate need to take votes they think are in their political interests. the fate of the dreamers is something that has preoccupied congress for some time. the congressman alluded to the fate of the farm bill -- >> the congressman alluded to the fate of the farm bill. can you help us understand? caucus,ouse freedom which mr. jordan is a leader of, took down the farm bill a couple of weeks ago basically because they wanted to address the immigration bill first. they were promised by leadership that there would be a vote on the conservative immigration bill that really focused on not just the daca children, but more border security and the border wall. when they did not get their vote on the bill, they decided to hold up something that everybody
andhe conference wants things is good, which is the farm bill. it is a priority for the speaker, as he is on his way out the door. it is very important to a number of folks around the country who have farms in their districts. a number of constituencies. the big priority of the year as we look forward to the midterm elections. right now, jordan wants to move forward on a farm bill, but he said let's do immigration first. they are sticking to their guns and want to tackle immigration, then turn to the farm bill. >> he seems to still be qualifying that. it is not just whatever happens and then we go to the farm bill. there was hedging that makes me think they will keep the leverage on the farm bill if the immigration debate doesn't play out the way conservatives want to see happen. >> questions around leadership.
how is the republican conference right now? outgoing speaker >> if you listen to mr. jordan he did not suggest that's speaker ryan should leave in the did notf this term and want to seem to force him out as the freedom caucus did to john boehner three years ago. it is interesting because they are putting pressure on the speaker to take certain actions but no one is calling for his head. the whispers around the capital more and more are that there is a growing frustration with the speaker, whether that amounts to him departing ahead of schedule before january, but certainly there are whispers happening. >> and he said that he was frustrated several times on a couple of different issues.
the question is what does the frustration materialize into? have three weeks in washington in july and same in september for the house. is there enough time on the calendar to mount a big rebellion and is their appetite for that? >> that's it for our time. christina peterson and scott wong. we appreciate your time this week. >> thank you. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] sunday on two and a ross talks about his book to change the church. >> he thinks that the church needs to change in various ways. around issues related to the sexual revolution , marriage, divorce, and so on. ,here prior post basically said
these are changes the church cannot make. there have been these fraught places in his pontificate where he has clashed with cardinals, bishops, theologians over just how far he can push the church to change, what the church can change without either undercutting its own traditions or breaking faith with the new testament, the gospels, jesus christ. q&a, sunday night on c-span. live coverage from the u.s. north korea summit between president donald trump and north korean leader kim --g-il and -- kym johnson kim jong-un. watch live on c-span and c-span.org. or listen using the free c-span radio app. >> house majority leader kevin mccarthy and democratic with steny