The world. Are you comfortable with the way the Trump Administration has handled . Has the president done enough to stay ahead of the story . Let me say this. As a member of congress, my focus is to make sure that we appropriate the necessary funds to provide the resources to our hospitals, local communities, states. We need to come together and provide the funds. We can make judgments along the way. The Vice President is the head of the effort to coordinate activities. We will make our judgments as this unfolds. We had a briefing today in the house that we found really informative. I think what we need to be focused on is making sure that we provide the necessary resources to our communities. From that briefing, what is your number one concern . Concerned that we still dont know a lot about the virus. I want to make sure our constituents are protected. They are a first line of defense. The funding level for the National Institute of health is up 40 in five years. Substantial increase at the cdc. Substantial increase at our strategical stockpile of medical supplies. Was the chairman of the Infectious DiseaseRapid Response fund. The current chairman of that committee continued that and added additional funds to it. Congress actually i will tell you, they gave more money than the last administration asked for or this administration in these critical areas. Sooner or later, this kind of day would come. You have to do the preparation over the long time. We have done that. We are better positioned than most countries. You have the immediate response. Im with my friend, the chairman. It is early days. I have lots of confidence in our professionals at the center for Disease Control and at the National Institute of health as well. Thats where the responses. Our job is to make sure that we and the resources they need to make sure we have the resources at the local and state level that we need. Weve done a good job today. You can look at the number of cases in the United States versus a lot of countries. Things will get worse before they get better. We need to deal with that in realtime. That means substantial resources available. I agree with the chairman. This needs to be a bipartisan effort. In terms of funding and out of congress, it will be. You are in the u. S. Capitol hearing room. There have been cutbacks in some programs that democrats are concerned about. Lets focus on this funding. There havent been cutbacks. There have been continuous increases. I was the chairman there for four years. We increased it every single year. We did it again this year. Cutting particular programs or whatever, yeah. This is the most substantial sustained increase in over 15 years. Looking to next week come at you expect a vote next week on a funding mechanism sick8 mechanism. I think it will be substantial. I dont know if it will be as soon as next week. The message has been given to the appropriate people responding. Look, you should do everything you need to do. Dont let lack of money stop you. The money should be there. Ask us for what you need, when you need it. I think there will be an additional response. As the chairman said, this is a new disease. It is unpredictable. We dont know as much as we would like to know. That point was made in our briefing this morning. It would not surprise me if we did a substantial initial tranche and as we learn more, we might get another request. That would be perfectly appropriate. I think the real message is, we intend to deal with this. Everybody has made that clear, regardless of their political preferences. To make surets that the American People are protected, the resources are available. Im comfortable with this. Congress will act in a bipartisan way to provide those resources. Year and appropriator. The administration, the Top Administration has only asked for about 2. 5 billion to deal with the coronavirus. Are looking in the Appropriations Committee at significantly more than that. Does that Say Something about how seriously the administration is taking this . No. I dont think it says that at all. I work regularly with dr. Fauci,d, cdc, dr. So these arer, career professionals, doctors, people that are very skilled administrators. We get an initial request, we are going to look at it in terms of that request but also more themey, picking up on a that my colleague laid down, we have to think about the local response mechanisms as well and making sure that they have what they need and what they are that they are reimbursed when they go beyond. I think the signals from both sides have been, the right approach. We dont want to you be penny wise. We want you to put the wealth wellbeing of the American People first. We want to make sure that the funding is available to do that. Next weeks hearing on the erosion of congressional checks and balances on the executive branch, you are depicting it as a longterm look back, decades of actions. Coming now with President Trump in office, how are you not getting responses that this is geared to him . Withhave some problems overreach by this administration. Democratic friends have had problems too. This is not unique to one president. The erosion of Congressional Authority has been happening for quite some time. Fromiend and i, we are different political parties. Im a liberal, hes a conservative. We are both institutionalist. We both respect the constitution. The last few over decades, congress has been too willing to cede authority that is rightfully ours to the executive branch. The executive branch has been willing to take it. At the end of the day, that doesnt serve the American People. It undermines the constitution. We are the house of representatives. We are the closest to the people. We have to get elected every two years. You cant serve unless you have been voted on by the people. I think we are closer to where the people are. Decisions, wese should have a role in them. We are not right now. I think that does not serve our constituents well. This is a good time to do it. This hearing is not going to be about donald trump barack obama or bill clinton or whatever. We will talk about what our authority is and where it has lapsed. We will make recommendations. The nexte for administration, whoever they may be. It seems to me that part of the problem here with expanding executive power is partisanship in congress. That members of each party tend to support a president of the party,arty, their own whether that means the erosion of their own power or not. Next week, will you present specific ideas that can bring both parties together . What are those ideas . Was that directed to me or tom cole . I would like to hear what both of you have to say. What are your specific ideas for bringing powers back to congress . I dont want to get ahead of the game. We are doing something a little bit radical. Holding hearings and actually getting judgments from them. I have ideas but i dont know whether they are good ideas. You are absolutely right. When theres a democratic president in power, democrats tend to be a little bit shy of whenenging that president they have exceeded their authority. The same could be true for republicans. Thats why this is a good time to have this hearing. We are talking about a future administration. How we should conduct ourselves. Some of you know, i have been very concerned about the war powers act and about president s that have exceeded their authority in getting us involved in conflicts all around the world. Thatperating still was 18 years ago. Theres no process in place for regular review or whether it should be sunsetted maybe. Maybe there were other ideas. The way we are going right now, whoever is sitting in these chairs 100 years from now mike p able to refer to a 2001 authorization for the use of military force to justify military action someplace in the world. Thats not the way it should work. Most reasonable people on both sides of the aisle get that. We will try to do is to see whether there are processes and procedures we can put in place that even out the balance better. Commerce michael . I agree very much with what the chairman had to say. Powersncerned about war long before there was a republican president. We were working on this one president obama was in. You cant question jim mcgoverns chris adage credentials. I think hes the ideal person to lead this discussion because he andnstrated his loyalty interest in defending the institution of the house of representatives regardless of who was president and who was speaker. We approach it very much in that fashion. Togethere were talking , 70 made the point, we have very distinguished witnesses. Wouldnt it be wonderful if no one could tell if it was a republican witness or a democratic witness . These are people here to talk about the appropriate balance within the constitution of the United States. Theres a very widespread sense that spans the political spectrum and overlaps the partisan divide in congress that we have simply given away too much of our authority in a variety of areas. Aboutlly, we will be shy being real specific about this president. We want to get past this and have a discussion of what would really work. Some of it may be as simple as, you have to have the courage to replan the balances that are already there. There may be some ideas about not extending let me put it to you this way. Votedt think that anybody for the use of military force in 2001 truly believed it would still be applicable today in 2020. I did not believe they meant that the happen. Once you cede this power to the administration, even without a timeline or a clearly defined objective, it is tricky in a war on terror. We are dealing with a transnational enemy that is not a traditional state actor. Thats what the war powers were usually designed for. There have been ways in the past of dealing with the barbary pirates are having an official conflicts with the french at sea. Congress has been able to assert the authority. We need to have this discussion and relearn our own history. We need to see where we can update it. On my side of the aisle, members are excited that the opportunity to participate in this kind of day i want to applaud the chairman for this. We have some other committees that are trying to do this. We have a Bipartisan Committee which was one of my friends ideas. The modernization of congress. Its an appropriate place to have this discussion as well. We need to have this discussion a lot of different places is we will protect the legislative power. This is most likely the power of the people. A lot more directly than it is for a president who is elected on an Electoral College basis or United States senate where everybody is the same regardless of the size of the state. We each represent districts that are roughly the same size. The popular will exercises itself most clearly in the house of representatives. Its our responsibility of custodians of that power to make sure that its preserved and that the peoples voice is heard loudly and clearly in congress. Let me follow up quickly to that point. You are a student of history. Can you point to one event that you think began to erode congresses authority . Let me put it this way. It goes back decades. This is not a recent phenomenon. We talk about war powers. There are historical examples we can point to. Declarations of National Emergencies. See thate all can there are such things as National Emergencies that require immediate action by whoever the president may be. We had National Emergencies that were enacted when jimmy carter was president. They are still in effect today. Shouldnt there be a mechanism to look at these and update them in this everchanging world . We have ceded our power in terms of how taxpayer dollars are spent back in our communities. We rely too much on the administration, whoever that may be, to make those decisions. We are closest to our own districts and constituencies to know what works best in a row areas. There is area where i think we need to reassert our authority. For the about power sake of grabbing more power for the house of representatives. That weut making sure are covering the people we represent. In the house of representatives, we are the most direct link the people of the country. A lot of these executive actions can be voted against in congress. The veto was always there. That seems to be one of the main problems to any thing you guys might be able to come up with. Constitutionala amendment attempt . I think there are other things short of a constitutional amendment that we could explore. I hope thats what these hearings do. Look, i mentioned the war powers issue earlier. Me, there is something wrong with the fact that its easier to declare war or get involved in a war than it is to actually get to peace. You just need a simple majority to vote to authorize the use of military force. Knowing that the president would veto an action by congress to end a war if they didnt want to, it requires a super majority. We need to have a discussion on whether that is the appropriate way should best to approach these issues. What were looking for is to reestablish balance. When you read the constitution, article one, article two, it was pretty clear what the responsibilities were of congress and of the executive branch. What we have seen here is just an erosion of the power of congress in a way that i think our ability to be better representatives of our constituents. Also, it has resulted in the lessening and diminishing of the voice of the people of the country. Cosmical congressman cole . Isnt part of the problem here that congress has failed to compromise on important policy issues . Take immigration for example. Congress has failed to act on immigration policy. As a result, you have president obama implementing his Deferred Action Program to provide legalization for some unauthorized immigrants. Now you have President Trump declaring a National Emergency to build a wall. The president s are trying to deal with important policy issues. Congress could pass a law, could it not . I could not agree with you more. I think that is a very fair criticism of the institution. Its unwillingness to actually cast votes. Ill also say, i used to be a pollster for living, the American People need to look at this. Nobody gets rewarded for compromise anymore. To votere not willing for people that are willing to cut a deal to get something for everybody, if you cast those people as sellouts and say you have to be appear as, that will be what you get. It makes legislation impossible. Appropriations is a give and take exercise. Its finding a middle ground that the majority can it read on. Can agree on. . The immigration issue is a perfect example that you brought up of a problem you have to make tough decisions and go home and be willing to defend them. The same thing is true in almost any other area. Nobody will get everything they want. If you dont actually legislate, you open the door for the executive branch to come in and say, you guys arent dealing with this. This is what im going to do. Im sure thats what president obama was arguing on the immigration issue. He sent enough legislation appear. He made enough proposals. We had two president s in a row that would have signed any immigration bill that congress would have passed. They wanted to work with congress. We just didnt muster up the will to actually get that done. Thats on us. Thats not on the president. Honestthere is soulsearching in this debate as well. , weve refused to exercise the power we have and we have drawn the executive branch into areas that shouldve been dealt with the legislative we. Let me follow up. President trump has used a declaration of a National Emergency on the southern border in order to begin construction of his border wall. The house has taken a couple votes to rescind that National Emergency. You voted against it. You voted to allow the wall construction to continue. If next january, we are greeting a new president , president bernie sanders, and he declares a National Emergency on climate debt, will yount also allow him to continue in that regard . Will you see it differently . I would not vote for the measures you are talking about. Im not going to vote to oppose a president when i support what hes trying to do. The real question is the 1976 power to we gave the the president to declare a National Emergency. That has happened 60 times. 59 of them were not controversial. Two of those dealt with the border. Cartels, one was the last unexpected surge of migrants we had. Both of those by president obama. Both of those got republican votes. If we will question i dont question of president s use of the power we gave them. You would not have the fight on the issue. You go back to the original bill, the power to declare that, and put some sort of limitation on it or put a time limitation on the emergency. The chairmen had a good idea. How can you have an emergency that last 60 years . Most of us think of an emergency as something that is happening in real time in the short term. We granted that power. I doubt that anybody in my 1970 thought that this would be in in the same way as it was 2019. That suggests a limitation on some of these things in terms of time or scope. Pastimes, we dont look the next november. We need to start thinking a lot longer timeframe. Final question. Have either of you heard from the white house or the administration about this hearing . At any point, do you expect to hear or call anybody from the administration to talk about this . I should comment first. They are more likely to call me and complain. I certainly have not. We have had no communication about this. This is my Friends Initiative which i fully support. Broadk it will have bipartisan support inside the congress. Trump does not coming regularly. I havent heard from him. Look, this is about us. This is about this institution. Discussion. T one maybe it will lead to something. Figuring out whether we can restore some balance here. This is not just about the institution, just about upholding article one of the constitution. Its about making sure that the people of this country are being represented in the way that they our fathers envisioned. We want to be more effective and responsive. Thats a good thing. I know that weve had these informal discussions on both sides of the aisle. Democrats, republicans are concerned about this issue. The politics get in the way sometimes. The partisanship gets in the way. We will see whether we can cut through that and move in the direction where we could do something. At the appropriate time, the administration will weigh in. Maybe they will surprise me and be supportive. Who knows . We are not at that point yet. It is a hearing we are covering on tuesday. And tom cole of oklahoma. Thank you for joining us on newsmakers. Thank you. We continue our conversation in the studio. Housing it begins as the hearing . It is the first hearing of this sort that i can recall. Ive been in the capital for several years. There are real roadblocks to pulling both parties together in ways that could atually work against president from this party or from the other party. Theyre really has to be some institutionalism that i dont think is there at this point. Part of the problem is that some of these laws they are mentioning, the National Emergencies act, is a 1970s law that was passed at a time when there was significantly more bipartisanship in congress. We are now at a time of great polarization. Its almost impossible to get the kind of super majorities congress would need to pass a law over a president ial veto. President s are not willing to give up their power. Bottom line, what will come from this hearing and this initiative . Thatthink the best hope is when they are passing future authorizations of military force, for example, they will include a sunset clause in those laws that will require congress to revisit them several years later. Thats always an occasion for and for congress to reexert its power. The worst thing is the Trump Administration and the president supporters saying he is being singled out. Why wasnt this hearing held during the Obama Administration . We thank you for being with us here at newsmakers. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] real clear politics, Washington Bureau chief carl cannon discusses the history of super tuesday primaries and caucuses and provides a peek at what to expect from the super tuesday 2020. Youve got one third of the delegates that will be at the Democratic Convention in milwaukee that will be chosen on tuesday. We wont know all of them. California will take a while to count. You start to think it, in a crowded field, one person can win most of the states, the advantage they have may be insurmountable. Watch sunday night at 8 00 eastern on cspans q a. Cspan, your unfiltered view of government. 1979 andy cable in brought to you today by your television provider. Gary shapiro is president and ceo of the Consumer Technology association and he is our guest this week on the communicators. What is the cta and who you represent . Thank you for having me. Its great to be had back here. Its a nonprofit trade association representing over 2000 American Technology companies. Coolestce the greatest, most amazing event in the world. That is the ces held each january in las vegas. We will get to that in a moment. For some of the Member Companies . Everybody would expect to see at your local best buy. Startups as well. The you take policy positions . We have very strong and clear policy positions. We are very strong in certain areas. We stay out of other areas. What is one policy decision . We believe strongly in the concept that innovation is a good thing and we should foster innovation. It is something that is in our dna. We excel at it. We want to make sure that people can create