Dead or dying . David i think the leadership in the house and senate decided its dead and ignoring it. Although i was pleased that over half the House Republicans voted no, even with pressure from the white house and their leadership to vote yes for it. But its true. Epublicans have become big spenders. At least the house and Senate Leadership republicans, just like the democrats. And the tea Party Started out as an independent group. They lined up with republicans because they were smaller government, but they were suspicious of politicians, and i think that sentiment is very much alive. If you had to describe it today, how would you describe President Trumps fiscal legacy . David my view is President Trump worked hard to reduce spending and they were ignored by republican allies in the house and senate, and couldnt get better deals than what they got. So right now, its building debt. And thats going to be a big problem for our country. Weve been saying that for probably a decade now. The economy, fortunately, is expanding, which i think is the trump legacy. That expansion lets you absorb more and get a chance to get to a balanced budget. But you have to put the brakes on spending to do that. You put the responsibility on the part of republicans in the house and senate. But theres also a republican in the white house. Two what do you attribute this change in attitude towards deficit spending other than the fact republicans were against it when there was a democratic president , and now for it when theres a republican president . David i see a couple of them couple of dynamics. The omb is a deficit hawk. They work very hard to try to keep that lower. I kind of think with the president s encouragement and approval. But youve got the big spenders, particularly in the senate, the procreatives on the republican side, are happy to spend larger amounts. They think its good politics and they dont mind if some of the money goes to democratic causes and some of it goes to theirs. You also have a complicated dynamic among republicans right now, where defense talks have basically made a deal for about five years now with the democrats. If you let us increase the defense spending where we think it should be, well sign on to your domestic spending, let you decide where that goes and what its for. That secondhalf cuts against everything they campaigned on, reducing welfare, the size of government. But their goal of having a strong, robust defense department, lets them trump that and sign up for spending goals. You guys have since refashioned yourself as a pro club pro Trump Organization ahead of the 2020 election. I was wondering if you would explain that decision you made. David yeah, and let me go back a little bit. Youre right. We had other candidates that were club supported candidates that we preferred. But when President Trump at the nomination, we stepped back and did things that supported him in pennsylvania and wisconsin, where we had candidates running for senate. Then when he got elected, he started governing on our agenda in many respects. The taxcut bill, repeal and replace, obamacare, cutting regulations and making that a primary goal. Trade was an area where we still werent aligned, but he started to articulate a goal of 00 tariffs, but im going to use tariffs to bring people to the table. Weve accommodated that and said tariffs are costly and hurt the economy, but well support you and try to negotiate for the much better trade deal. And the bottom line answer, hes governed as a freemarket conservative for the most part. Its those policy results that dictate where we go and where we align. Looking forward to the next election, he clearly is going to be the most freemarket candidate there is. And hes going to be up against a democrat, almost all of whom are now starting to move towards socialism or very radical big government, leftist, nonfreemarket proposals. So the contrast is going to be really clear. So for our goal, promoting policies, President Trump being reelected makes sense. So were aligning with that and doing things that would help him position himself to be in a good place to run for reelection. Speaking of 2020, now 15 months away, do you know how much the club is going to spend in the cycle . And how much of that is president ial versus congressional . David let me share what were doing now because it gets to the nswer. Essentially we decided President Trump has his own campaign, his own super pac educated to that. He didnt really need club for growth money being spent on his behalf. Ut what we could do is highlight the chaos thats going on in the democratic field. But to do that, and alex reported on that, knows some of the things weve done, we have to think how do we communicate to democrats in their primary about their issues and their values . Very different. We kind of started by recognizing none of them are going to be progrowth on freemarket candidates. But what will they care about on their terms, and how can we understand that and bring that information to bear . With joe biden, we ended up doing an ad that highlighted his discord between his earlier positions on racial positions and current positions. Kamala harris picked that up, ran with it in the debate, and its been something hes had to deal with since then. Early on with beto, we knew all about him in the texas race against ted cruz, and that he really wasnt the progressive innovative guy he was projecting himself to be. He, in the past, had done a lot of things to help big business. Again, to the disadvantage of poor, hispanic people in el paso. We highlighted that so the voters in iowa would know that. We decided the best thing the club could do in this stage is bring forward those two things, information, messages, let them affect what is going on on the democratic side of the primary next year. You were asking how much well spend. I couldnt tell you how much it will be. But i think what well end up doing is focus on areas where nobody else is bringing forward a message, and fits with our alignment of fiscal conservatism and broadcast the differences. Do you think it will be more than what you spend in the 2016 cycle . David i think it will be on par with that. We spent a lot. Ballpark . David 14 million 15 million in 2016. I dont think it will be that much. Well end up focusing on senate and house races, the bulk of the resources. It wont be as much, but it will e significant. One of the strongest arguments President Trump has for reelection is the economy. But weve had a number of signals from markets and Consumer Confidence that maybe things this growth cycle were on has run its course. What tools does the president have left in his toolbox, after already cutting taxes and regulations weve seen a decrease in interest rates. We have a deficit spending fueling the economy right now. If we do end up in a recessionary cycle, what else can the president do . What else can congress do . Or is he really at the end of his rope . David great question, gregory. I think the key there now is in the trade ground. One, the fundamentals are swollen. Youre seeing volatility in the marketplace as people are projecting where were going to be 18 months ago from now. Where do i put my money . They put it in treasuries. Thats crated temporary inversion. But the fundamentals of production, economic growth, unemployment, are still very, very good. Whats happened that i think is causing volatility in the market space, the president s strategy in china imposed tariffs on china, and those are ultimately a cost to the american people. That one point, i think he articulated it. Were doing well now. Let me use this tool. I understand the tariffs might be a drag on the economy, but now is the time to do it because both sides will benefit. Hasnt he tried to go both ways on that . He delayed implement and tariffs saying he didnt want consumer staffs to pay. David right, which i think is recognizing that the tariffs are a drag right now on economic growth. Theyre i wouldnt say a small drag. They werent as significant as other things. Like higher taxes or more regulation. What it really means is the window is narrowing for when we have to get the new trade agreement. When that happens, then i think you see another boost to economic growth, sustain the cycle were in for a number of years because youve got certainty, basically, in the World Economy about trade with the United States. And im actually confident the president is able to deliver on that. Its taken time. The chinese basically called him on it and said we think you have to have an agreement in name, but we dont have to give you any subsidy substantive concessions. But trump called an audible. m not just going to sign an agreement that Means Nothing in reality but says we have an agreement. There has to be a real concession. China, by the way, is hurting worse than the United States. Theyre a dictatorship. They can last through the next election cycle, but its also possible theyll get to the point where they see it as a winwin to meet us partly. Would you say the United States is winning the trade war . David i think the fact that china needs to consider basically accepting International Test intellectual property rights, changing their fundamental business model. Theyre saying no right now, but its on the table for something they have to concede. Thats a win. Were still in the middle of the backandforth of the negotiation. Theres no clear winner, one way or the other. But the possibility of getting a good trade agreement is there. Club for growth has been participating in a special election in North Carolina next month. To what extent is that contest going to be National Issues weve been discussing . And to what extent, given that this is a republican seat, is there pressure on the party to win this seat come next month . David to your second question, i think theres tremendous pressure on the party. Kevin mccarthy has laid out a plan to retake. If he loses, it will be much harder next year. We are coordinating with what we do in the super pac with what both entities are aligned. We like dan bishop, the candidate. Hes a strong, fiscal conservative. Mccready is a democrat. Hes actually very vulnerable on nonpartisan issues because he wont answer questions and it looks like hes hiding liberal views. And the voters are starting to sense that. So, i think in the one way, every election for congress has a local element. They have people they like and dont like. This one is starting to become nationalized. Its going to be, will a trump supporter, republican, be able to win what should be a republican seat against a democrat who tries to distance himself from nancy pelosi . Tries to, but then has overwhelming support from radical environmental groups aligned with some of the new green deal and the most radical elements of their agenda. So, i think its a test. Will a mainstream conservative republican, who supports the president , win against a democrat who claims not to be a socialist like everybody else, but in reality is supported by the same forces . You tend to get involved more often in open seats, but you havent been afraid to challenge republicans in primaries. Does your Strategy Change now that democrats are in control of the house of representatives . Are you defending more seats . Are you attacking more seats . David yeah, thats a very good insight. We still kind of reserve that, if a republican is acting more like a democrat than a good free market conservative, well challenge an incumbent. But we looked at this week was getting more progrowth candidates into the conference. So, we started with open seats where there were republican retirees. We identified good potential candidates there. Then we looked at democrat seats where democrats won, but trump had carried the district. Thats a great challenger race because the turnout will be more balanced, and a republican has a chance to win. So well engage in the primary to get a progrowth candidate who can carry that. And we have had to be on the defensive in a couple races. The democrats have their target list of sitting republicans that they think are still vulnerable. One of them is a great candidate, we think is going to win, but its going to be a tough race, is it scott perry and pennsylvania. Weve got a mix of all those. One of my favorite races is the virginia seven, where dave lost. Democrats have a strong incumbent. Weve identified a strong potential candidate there and believe that it could be a bellwether of whether republicans can get the majority back. Who are some republicans acting more like democrats . David some of them are retiring. But one of them is elise stefanik, who has been put in charge of recruiting. You look at her voting record, she aligns much more closely with emigrants in congress than the majority of the republican conference. Shes a likable person. People like her. But her voting record is not that strong. I know you put out a scorecard on members of congress. Justin amash, independent, is somebody who has a 99 record with the club for growth on the things that you score. Are you going to be supporting him in 2020 . David youre right. Justin has a great record on our Economic Issues. He basically made a political misstep in calling for President Trumps impeachment. I think hes wrong on the merits on that. But also, that means i dont think hes a viable candidate on that. We look for ideology. Are they promote test committed to progrowth agenda . And are they electable . Weve got about five minutes left. President trump held a rally in new hampshire, talked up candidacy of corey lewandowski. Should he enter the senate race, does he represent the kind of candidate club for growth would support . David we havent met with corey yet, and were going to and well find out after that interview. Wed like to see what hes going to campaign on. Is it fiscal issues . Or is it social issues we dont engage on . One of the things i find appealing about that is it would put the democrats on defense in the senate race, everyone assumed would not be a race this year. As, when you think about it, its always better to be on offense than defense. And potentially, corey could achieve that in new hampshire. For maybe one question that well ask you to put on your other hat, cofounder of the federalist society. What is the mix here of Economic Issues, social issues, that the Supreme Court was a very animating force in President Trumps election the first time around. Please of the kind of Supreme Court justices im going to nominate. Can that issue still propel his base to the polls, or do you need to make the economic argument youve been making . David right, so conventional wisdom is if the economy is strong, the president will be reelected. There is data going back multiple decades that will be the case. So, the economic issue is always really important. But your point is a good one. The courts became a symbol on a lot of the social issues because the court had driven issues on marriage, issues on life. Those are ones we dont engage in. But i think President Trump successfully harnessed that conservative momentum by picking really good potential justices and campaigning on that. I see that happening again. I would project that one, hell want to make that another issue. And i suspect the democrats will want to make their view a entral part of the campaign, given what happened on the last Supreme Court nomination, where you saw a very stark divide between the party. Not about confidence, and it ended up being a character assassination. But in the end, i think the democrats justified character assassination because they didnt want the principal of a conservative justice on the court. Social issues . Or what kind of Business Decisions . David by the way, we do engage on confirmations because a lot of Business Decisions are at stake. Regulating the internet, right . The court is going to decide the use of government power to nationalize industries, which some of the democrats are calling for. Those could be decided by the Supreme Court. It goes beyond social issues. And its also about who decides in our system . Do we want to have the constitutional system weve had, where decisions are mostly done in the elected branches, and the court, as the chief justice says . Or do we want a Super Legislature to enact progressive, socialist, whatever label, legislation that doesnt have majority support . Thats really what the court comes down to. Are we going to have separation of powers and a Constitutional Government that limits what the court does . Or do we go towards an era where the court becomes a Super Legislature . Conservatives strongly believe the role of the court is limited to interpreting the laws and not making it. If theres an opening on the Supreme Court next year, should Mitch Mcconnell move to fill any vacancy with the president s nomination . David absolutely. If the president has the opportunity to fill that vacancy, he should do it, pick a strong nominee, and the senate should do its work to confirm it. One more question each. Youve been involved in the conservative movement for some time. The nra has been going through a lot of turmoil, and i know youre on the outside, but do you believe there needs to be a shakeup at the nra . And what is the future of the nra at this point . David the nra stands for a value that is central to conservatism. Its the second amendment, but fidelity to constitutional liberties and freedoms. I think theyre going to get through the season and emerge as a very strong organization. From the outside, i wouldnt want to be suggesting what they do or how they do it. Thats something thats up to them, their board, their president , but i have confidence that they will be able to get through that and be a strong organization. One issue we havent talked about is immigration, which i know is in a core issue for club for growth. But conservatives have, in the past, especially economic conservatives, have wanted strong immigration to help fuel the labor pool. Where do you see the current immigration environment . And is there room still yet weve been waiting a decade for some sort of comprehensive Immigration Reform that would reconcile interests that would people on the right side of the spectrum had . David your right, club for growth stays out of the immigration debate. In large part, our members are divided in the way you describe it. Some believe in robust immigration and markets for labor. Others believe its a National Security issue, the wall and that represents that. So, we dont take a position on that one way or the other. The most interesting thing ive seen were remarks the president made recently that he was actually in favor of robust legal immigration, but wanted to stop illegal immigration. Thats not really a compromise. Its a different way of looking at that issue that gets beyond the current rhetoric of good or bad, wall or no wall. It puts together a more coherent approach that recognizes illegal immigration thats good for the country. I was fascinated when i heard him say that, and i think it could end up changing the dynamic of that issue. Are there other issues where you take that same approach they re divided on . David yes, and its less a division then discipline to stay. On the Economic Issues e dont engage on social issues, marriage issues, right to life issues. And thats from the founding of the club for growth. And were very careful to make sure we dont engage on those issues. For example, there are a couple of gay republicans who have very good records on Economic Issues. My view is the club for growth can be very comfortable endorsing someone like that if theyre the candidate that can in the race. So, on the other hand, a lot of our candidates are strongly prolife champions. And were happy that what they do on the economic issue and they conclude that the whole spectrum of conservative issues is what they care about. Well have to ended end it there. David mcintosh, thank you for being on newsmakers this week. Great to be with you as always. Now we continue with the roundtable portion of the program. Alex, known for its heavy spending and its packs and super pacs, what stuck out for you from what mr. Mcintosh said about the clubs strategy for 2020 . What was interesting is he was talking about it was almost like meddling in the democratic president ial primary. You heard him talk about theyde. You heard him talk about how they went after candidates. This is something that you dont really see other republican groups doing right now. They are, other groups, the Trump Campaign are husbanding the resources, waiting for the democratic nominee to be picked. When you see it, the club for taking celexa issues and going after democrats to shape it. I agree with alex. It is a symptom of where the club for growth and the issues that they represent are right now. I always thought of them as the business oriented end of the tea party movement. A bit of tea party meets chamber of commerce. They were antitrump in the beginning. They were neutral in the general election and other have come around full circle to supporting him, even though we heard from them about the reservations they have overspending and tariffs. They are trying to reconcile with trump. He is going to be the republican nominee. They dont have an alternative other than a strategy of meddling in the democratic primary. Really, trying to shape up the general election has the be market,ogram of free with the exception of the trade issue policies. Something they will characterize as extreme socialism. On the congressional side, he talked about the spending in the North Carolina special election, saying it was something that needed to be done if republicans were going to retake the majority in the house. Is that how the Republican Congressional Committee is thinking about this as well, that it is do or die in the special election . It is a race that people will be increasingly focused on goinge no other races are on right now. You are going to see a tremendous amount of focus on the race taken place in Early September because people tend to see the special elections as a bellwethers for the season to come. Look, you can bet that there will be spending from congressional committees and you are likely to see more involvement from the white house in this because they know that if democrats were to take this traditionally republican seat it would look at for the gop next year. You asked about his judicial philosophy and his background with the federalist society. Why . The premise of the question was that it was bringing a coalition into the tent for 2016. Specifically evangelicals, catholic voters, the prototypical white workingclass voter. He won them over despite may be a more checkered personal history in terms of marriage and being a sort of new york died. He won over people in other parts of the country with this kind of old idea of having a Supreme Court list of telegraphing. Something no president had done before. Here will be my nominees. I was curious about whether that strategy could continue to work in a reelection effort. Or was this really all about the economy of the election . The problem is we are not quite sure which direction it is headed yet and if he is able to continue he might be in good shape, but there might be some warning signs with analysts who expect there might be a 33 chance of having a recession begin before the next. Coming back to his first answer on the deal on spending caps, has President Trump won over the fiscal conservatives . Did that do anything to shake did the deal do anything to shake the support . The fiscal at conservatives who are uncomfortable with the actions the white house has taken and you get the sense that under the normal circumstances the group would the group of club for growth would be uncomfortable with these policies. We are in a situation over the trump takeover of the Republican Party and conservative movement is about complete. Maybe there are some things that trump does that people are uncomfortable with, but they basically go along with it for the time being. Thats absolutely right. Was easier to do when there was a democrat in the white house. Easily easier to rail against deficit spending. It is giving the republicans in congress two thirds of what they want. More military spending and tax cuts and if the price for that is additional domestic spending, democrats in congress are willing to go along with that and that is the dynamic mr. Mcintosh described. Questionsposes some for the future about which party is more serious about deficit spending and it what point do we have to reckon with this . Look, times economically are relatively well now. That is historically when you should begin to pay down the debt. President clinton used the peace dividend from the and of the cold war, the increase in productivity that we saw from the. Com boom to actually be able to have surplus budgets in a couple of years. Certainly with these trillion dollar deficits there is nothing like that on the horizon and that is one of the issues the club for growth is going to have to reconcile itself to, regardless of who is in power in the future. We will have to end it there. Thank you both for joining us for newsmakers this week. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2019] , doug mills q a talks about photos covering. Resident trump obviously he enjoys having us around. Despite his constant comments about fake news and so forth, i think he likes that it drives the news of the day and it drives his message, which he can do and does as a every day, constantly driving a message, so having us around really allows him to do that. Thats tonight at 8 p. M. Tern on cspans q a tonight at 9 p. M. , a discussion on the future of the irs, and among the speakers ahead of criminal investigations, former tax fraud official and Taxpayer Advocate nina olson, who talks about problems with the irs fraud detection system. That is where we are concentrating ons fixes in the detection system. As you file returns you ask to go through the system and it has a high false positive rate. 81 of the nonidentity theft returns last year identified for not related items to identity theft, but like inflated wages or Something Like that, its just a mismatch of information. 81 of those stopped work legitimate, a determined they were legitimate. Thats an abominably high, you. Now, false positive rate we really have been focusing systemically to get it fixed because that has been the largest portion of our cases, increasing by 287 last year. Thats from the year before. If we could get them cleared out of our system we would be up to do a lot of good things. A discussion on the future of the irs hosted by the new york city bar association, tonight at 9 p. M. Eastern on cspan. Ferguson Ellyn Ferguson of cq roll call, the usmca named a replacement to the nafta agreement. What are some of the major changes . Well, it has a digital or ecommerce chapter because ecommerce did not exist at the time that the negotiations were done and certainly did not exist when the agreement came into force in 1994. There are some kind of harmonization or uniformity among rules for