Skip to main content

tv   Newsmakers Rep Patrick Mc Henry  CSPAN  May 10, 2019 11:06pm-11:38pm EDT

11:06 pm
and the director for the human rights campaign talks about amending civil rights law. then, national review contributor on his recent article examining china's economy. 7:00 "washington journal" eastern saturday morning, join the discussion. our road to the white house coverage continues tomorrow morning as presen -- presidential candidate beto o'rourke. online1:00 a.m. eastern at, or listen to the c-span radio app. "> our guest on "newsmakers representative mchenry. he returns after a long hiatus. he is a republican representing the 10th district from the
11:07 pm
charlotte suburbs to asheville north carolina. he's the seniormost republican on the finance committee. rep. mchenry: thank you for having me. our reporters will be asking the questions, from the wall street journal and a federal reserve reporter for the new york times. glad to have you here. rep. mchenry: the senate is in the nominee business, and we in the house are not. i do not spend much of my time obsessing about the nominating process. i watch it like most people in washington. pretty closely.
11:08 pm
more closely within my jurisdiction. those two offerings from the white house, they represent a different view out of the white house which is the polar opposite of the obama administration view. president obama put labor , this was an attempt to balance that out in a different direction. as my senate colleagues look at the details of individual nominees backgrounds, i do think it is interesting, the makeup of the fed board of governors and it is important to have folks willing to stay in long-term and look deeply at these issues. the fed, while they have great data, they are still in the people business. of the people on the board governors make balance sheet decisions, and it is more about onellect and feel than data
11:09 pm
any given day. that is a question of policy how to construct and limit the decision-making. i look at it as another part of the process of an interesting senate and nominating process, different than it has been in my previous years of service. that, whenw up on you are talking to your colleagues at the senate, do you think they should be who do notg nominees risk politicizing the fed? that was of major criticism of these nominees, they have close ties to the white house, the fed is in a political body coming so that raised eyebrows. rep. mchenry: i do not spend much time thinking about it. beforeenough on my plate analyzing the nominees. i think the president should get his nominees considered by the
11:10 pm
senate. i think the senate should be a better functioning body and how they process nominations up or down, whatever the outcome. the broader question for the the lasteserve is what president and every previous president has gotten their nominees on the board of governors, that has had a long-term effect. the important thing is the independence of the fed, to set interest rate policy and ensure the value of our money. we are the reserve currency for the world, we need to maintain that. the credibility of the fed goes right at that. i look at monetary policy and our balance sheets, i know they are in independent agency, independent of politics on capitol hill or the white house, but i recognize regulatory authorities, and that is where i spend my time looking at the fed.
11:11 pm
those regulations can have as much of an impact interest rate setting as from the federal reserve, and those areas, the hill has necessary and proper oversight in a forceful and meaningful way. wherein, you can see interest rates and balance sheet questions we have given to them to be independent of the hill. >> given that independence, does it mean the president or any high ranking official should be giving explicit public guidance to the fed chairman and potentially threatening their job prospect? rep. mchenry: the president tweets what he thinks and feels, that is different than previous presidents. some people like it, some people do not. the president has made his decision. what he is expressing is what every president has either privately expressed or quite in the dark of night expressed in their diary, as we found out
11:12 pm
over the last hundred years. what he is expressing is the expressingt fdr was and every president since then effectively. their interest rate setting, their analysis of the economy and everything else. is going tont publicly express his frustrations, and that is his communication style. and we agree upon in a bipartisan way, not perfect, but there is an understanding that we have legislated control of our monetary policy out of the hands of daily politics into longer-range thinking. we have had push and pull oversight, which is good. nuanceersight also gives and framework for what the fed does in terms of regulatory policy. that is fine.
11:13 pm
ofare currently in the midst allowed politics, and both the left and right, they see policy over the last 10 years as a frustrating thing, massive intervention in our economy. you are seeing more public expression from everyone on fed policy. i do not think that will calm down with a balance sheet as large as the fed has for quite some time. >> to ask about a different isrsight, the president resenting deutsche bank and complying withm democrats, do you think that lawsuit will be successful, and the you have concerns about what president that was set? rep. mchenry: this is a risky proposition. it is a risky proposition because as congress, the first branch of government, we are a
11:14 pm
coequal branch of government, there is proper congressional oversight of the executive branch. and executive branch agencies. proper oversight to get documentation to make law. the push and pull about this issue, the legal issue at stake is deeply problematic. if you go to the courts and they rule against congress, that can have a negative effect for our branch of government. i am concerned about it. i have another concern which is the president as a person, his family, and his businesses could curtail our coequal status in the courts. the request for this documentation is not about proper legislation, it is about getting something the president was not legally required to provide.
11:15 pm
you comply with the financial disclosure regimes such as it is for presidential candidates. did not comply with the tradition of letting his tax returns be made public. that is a tradition, a modern tradition, not a requirement of law. he complied with the law, but there is the of session with his business dealings, and so a lot of these requests go to the third point which is the mueller report. -- mueller team n extraordinary amount of time, they came to a think losing, -- they came to a conclusion. thanetter understanding getting documents from these institutions about things that have been queried by a special $30sel that has spent
11:16 pm
million to get to the bottom of the question of the 2016 election and the president's business dealings and how they could interact. this is a deeply problematic approach, and that is why i have been skeptical of this request. >> i would love to ask about regulations. you have obviously been on the front lines of urging the regulatory agencies to implement permissions,lief why do you think it needs to proceed more quickly. do you think there is any risk that implementing these things could risk fostering financial instability within the system? rep. mchenry: the heart of the question is what we passed in
11:17 pm
the last congress, which was 10 years after dodd frank was signed into law, we passed senate bill 2155 which is now law that rebalance dodd frank, took the most egregious aspects of dodd frank and sanded them down. the threshold for being considered a significant financial institution and therefore higher regulations, that was raised, and there is a bipartisan agreement. a number of things that can form with the sanding off of the rough edges of dodd frank, that bill got two thirds vote in the senate, and was signed into law. it is a bipartisan concept and the regulatorsw need to move quickly to provide relief for community financial institutions, which is the focus of this change.
11:18 pm
big banks are under the same regulatory challenges as under dodd frank. these were agreements we could reach for the smaller institutions. understandingisan because we see the stats. we have lost a third of community banks in this country over the last 10 years. a third of them. that is a significant thing. it is devastating for local communities. we see a community bank or institution merging or going out of business. we are trying to give that relief for the smaller institutions to get back to the business they should be n, community lending. if they get back into that, they can survive the changing marketplace. that was the focus. in the construct of our regulatory system, moderate in its effects overall, but
11:19 pm
significant to the smaller institutions. it will be helpful to our notomy in the long run and a component of the next financial crisis, if there were to be one. >> what do you think is the holdup? rep. mchenry: the whole .egulatory process is slow i am encouraging the regulators to move at a better pace because the next presidential election , and wedy in the media are seeing that takeover politics on the hill. i am saying for the regulators to move quickly before the politics of a presidential all ofn dominates washington that we cannot get anything done. get as much done as we can in the time we are given, and faithfully implement this bipartisan law. >> from a regulators perspective, politics should not
11:20 pm
be hugely important. of why are you worried about the political process interfering? rep. mchenry: it interferes with everything. as much as i would like to put blinders on and get to work, that is not how washington works. that hold up, the political cycle, i want to make sure there is a force against inaction and ,lowness, against skepticism and try forward to get relief for these institutions. we talk about politics, but the effect is what i am trying to get. the effect of these institutions is so significant, and that is what i want to stay focused on. those people in my community that need more choices for how they do their banking, for community institutions to stay with this additional
11:21 pm
regulatory burden put on them, and provide enough relief so they can continuously go on. >> speaking of big banks, let's talk about wells fargo. you have been critical of them, and they have not seems to right the ship. you talked about the role of shareholders and what they have to say versus what congress does. what congress does specifically, your committee, what is your thought on wells fargo? was mchenry: this bipartisan oversight, that is what it looks like. you have a company not following the law or regulation, had been fined by every regulator in a offt period of time based of strong reportage out of the los angeles times is what motivated the regulators to act. there is necessary oversight to look at the regulators and say, why does it take a los angeles time story to get off your hide
11:22 pm
and get to act? why did you find out about it from reporters and not the regulatory institution? what is this institution doing to their customers on an ongoing basis? if regulators continue to find and not givethem, them any out for their bad ?ctions ,e brought wells fargo forward we had the ceo and chairman testified. you saw bipartisan decision because they are failing to comply. that is proper oversight from congress. it is not pro-business or antibusiness, it is proconsumer, pro competition, pro-marketplace. have the saylders for the institution are regulators -- our regulators and
11:23 pm
laws must be complied with. this institution was not complying with those things. the shareholders have to account for that, so those three sectors, lawmakers, regulators, and their shareholders have driven action out of this very important national coverage. i think you can see that as a good act by congress to step forward and ride this conversation. there will be more work to be done because it is a large institution, they have yet to make the turn they need to, even though you have a second in two i do not have the gavel. i have my opinions about the committee action, i have laid that out with chairman waters on what i think would be the right set of hearings and legislation we need for the congress. she has the gavel and can make
11:24 pm
those decisions. we agree in some areas and disagree in others. we can function as a committee and try to find consensus where we can amidst bigger medical issues and day-to-day legislation can still occur. i think that is positive. >> one of the big fights is over disaster aid for states affected by various storms and floods. the president has more recently requested money for humanitarian assistance at the border. do you have concerns about trying to meld those considering how immigration has been of late? rep. mchenry: when you have a compromised product, you have a compromise. we need to keep the government open, and fund disasters, keep the government open and funding what is necessary at the border. because of the humanitarian issues there the wall and the
11:25 pm
presidents request on the border security measure, which i support, i think there is a bipartisan deal to be had absent the more polarizing elements. that is what tends to happen around government funding measures. the vote on disaster this , the democrats who hold the gavel's in the house, and the speaker will have to work something out with republicans if they want a bill enacted into law. they did not get a veto override, so they need to come back and talk to republicans to get down to the partisan cooperation -- bipartisan cooperation to take care of these national disasters and the border. >> the government is funded until october 1. you think this will not be resolved until much later? rep. mchenry: my hope is it is dealt with before then.
11:26 pm
it is up to the willingness of the democrats in the speaker to come to the table and have republican cooperation to get a bipartisan bill out of the house. >> you mentioned working with onirman waters to work bipartisan issues. wasof those you brought up the potential hearing of the fed balance sheet, which you noted is operationally independent of congress. curious what your goal was suggesting that hearing? rep. mchenry: is a serious issue, this is the second largest -- there are two portfolios the government owns. one is the fed balance sheet, and other is fannie mae and freddie mac and their balance sheet. we have had no hearings about
11:27 pm
.hose two issues this year it is important we have that conversation. fed, when they announced about interest rates, that became the news. the real news is that the end of the year, i do not understand why, their long-term economic view that has not been directly answered in many media outlets and even with the new transparency of the fed and what powell has attempted to do which is built on yellen and the opens effort of public posture. i think we need to get deeper on why they are stopping the balance sheet runoff that was what they agreed upon two years ago, and has now been halted. it is a consequential decision
11:28 pm
without much public clarity. are you not in favor of the fed holding a large balance sheet? rep. mchenry: i do not know why they are making that decision as a policy maker. is that decision borne out of government deficits long-term and debt long-term? is it what our economic activity looks like globally? between the euw economy, the question of brexit, chinese debt load, how all those things drive the conversation on the fed board of governors. the fed meeting minutes, we will know why they made this decision. we need somerun, understanding as a policy maker what this means for the american economy and consumer next year and the following year. next week week is the primary
11:29 pm
in north carolina's ninth district where we have seen quite a bit of chaos. where do you think the gop is at the end of this? do you see some reshuffling, and what are the prospects? quitechenry: it has been a primary. this is a neighboring district to mine. it has been interesting to watch. i have not endorsed any candidates. what happens with this primary will dictate whether or not republicans are in a competitive situation for the special election. leading candidates, one is a realtor, one is a state senator, they have gotten the most media attention. if the state senator avoids a runoff, or the realtor, then you
11:30 pm
have an earlier election date. that means you have a normalized turn situation across the district. if you have a later election date, charlotte local elections are held that day, and charlotte has more democratic votes, therefore it is an advantage to the democratic candidate. there are a lot of equations that went into the timing of the special election by the democratic governor in our state . it does have real consequences on the potential outcome. >> ready set expectations for republicans chances of taking back the house majority next year? rep. mchenry: i am optimistic. our candidate recruitment is more diverse than previous election cycles. we have more interest in these competitive races. recruitmentndidate so i have seen how this works up close.
11:31 pm
our congressman of new york is doing a focused job on not just recruiting female candidates, but also ensuring they are connected more broadly in a way that has not been about an effort among house republicans. lisa are doing our great additives and helpful to republicans broadly. >> that is it for our time. rep. mchenry: thank you for having me, i enjoyed the conversation. >> you are watching c-span's "newsmakers." .ongressman mchenry i want to start on working with the committee.
11:32 pm
thene waters is one of focus points of trying to get the financial records of the trump family. i am wondering what level of working relationship as a result? >> we see them working together on flood insurance, but they are going their separate ways. i thought the congressman's answer on the clash of subpoenas was interesting, because he did courtsedge that if the rule against them, it could have a long-term negative impact on their ability to do oversight, but at the same time he said he thought this was a personal vendetta against the president. you see that tension among a lot of republican lawmakers who are worried this could end up limiting their ability to do oversight on future presidents. host: we are saying a lot about the workings between the
11:33 pm
branches of government, what does it -- what is your take on the level they can have when this extra layer of scrutiny on the trump administration? hashe trump administration put republicans in congress, and especially those who are outspoken like representative mchenry, in interesting position. he has for a long time and even recently talked about the fed in ways that the president is at odds with. he was telling us he is interested in looking at the size of the balance sheet in the longer run. the president has been very vocal about wanting that balance sheet to remain big. underlines what is going on here where the president is not a traditional republican, and the more traditional republicans on the
11:34 pm
hill are having to walk a fine line. how does this position as the republican party seeks to reclaim the house of representatives? >> they are trying to increase women and the more diverse candidate pool. he talked about that. the challenge has been getting those republican women through the primaries. that is an interesting question to watch as we see the primary next week, and as those come in it was a because focused to get women to the primaries but we do not have a lot of examples of that being successful yet. anna policy standpoint, the point you are making, what does it mean to be a republican if you are up for reelection? >> it will be interesting. on one hand the president has
11:35 pm
handed republicans the best talking point available, which is a strong economy. the trump tax cuts and spending package have fed into stronger growth. we saw a move up in gdp relative to what we had been seeing. if you see that sustained into an election, that will be easy thing for republicans to talk about. who does not like growth and jobs? the problem will be if it is a sugar high and wears off, then you have the divisions we are talking about and weaker growth to contend with. and it is hard to keep the president focused on the economy. even with good economic numbers, the attention of the country and lawmakers get focused on other
11:36 pm
things instead. even though republicans would love to talk about the economy all the time, they do not manage to do that. host: thank you for being our guests. our road to the white house coverage continues tomorrow morning as presidential candidate beto o'rourke campaigns at a house party in bedford, new hampshire. you can watch live coverage at 11:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, online and, or listen on the free c-span radio app. tv was three giant networks and a government supported service called pbs. 1970 nine, a small network with an unusual name rolled out a big idea. let viewers decide on their own what was important to them. topan open the doors washington policymaking for all
11:37 pm
to see, bring you unfiltered content from congress and beyond. in the age of power to the people this was true people power. there is no monolith media. youtube stars are a thing. but c-span's big idea is more relevant today than ever. coverage isisan provided by your cable or satellite provider. c-span is your unfiltered view of government. you can make up your own mind. >> this week on "the communicators" we want to introduce you to andy purdy, chief security officer at huawei . what does that entail? andy: primarily, it is an internal role. forair the committee


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on