Joining us. He has been in the senate since 2012. You are on to committees that make it especially interesting to interesting now, health and Foreign Relations, but to issues that have been to the f ore this week and will be so for a long time. I want to talk about the resistance, and then i want to talk about some policy, especially the areas that your committees oversee, whether labor, health care, education, or Foreign Policy issues. You can take questions, that you were at the senate until 2 30 this morning. The third night in a row. Are obsessed with diet mountain dew. Is the help you get kind of like a warm mountain dew. I am going to put that down. When you were elected, you were the youngest senator, and now you think have been a by one or two guys. You have proven your stamina this week. I want to start with a question. Center ll at the you were at the senate this night pulling allnighters. Planned parenthood is planning mass protests, the fourth weekend of Major National activism by critics of the president. Going. You keep this going . Can this be sustained through question 2020, and the to ask, is you worked hard this but betsy devos got confirmed. How do you keep this going . Senator murphy im exhausted. So its hard to understand how this pace continues, but i dont think we have any other choice and i think though we lost nomination place this week that werent unexpected, there is a feeling amongst those that are coming out and engaging in these protests that they are meaningful and can see tangible ways result. Clearly, these judicial decisions on ban, right, are keeping people coming out. Im not saying that organized protests is what led to those decisions, but they feel as if the system is not falling apart. And that is a win. Senator murphy it is a win. And then i think for a lot of people, theyve watched the transition of the rhetoric on the Affordable Care act. Where, you know, the republicans started out saying they were going to repeal it and then delay it and take three or four years to replace it, and then they were going to repeal it and immediately replace it and then they were going to repeal it and immediately replace it with something just as good and then now just repair it. I think folks feel that republicans are responding to this mass outrage across the country. Yeah, i think its hard to imagine how the pace keeps up, but to the extent that people feel like theyre getting somewhere, that theyre having an impact is not showing their enthusiasm, and i think some of it is beginning to organize itself, not from, you know, democrats in washington. In connecticut, you know, where this was sort of purely organic at the beginning, now on a regional and townbytown basis, its organized, largely on facebook and on social media. But as that starts to occur, it allows the folks leading it at the Grassroots Level to kind of pace out the protests in a way that makes it sustainable. Theres so much frustration with donald trump among the base of the party. You just outlined several examples of. Do you see areas where, at this point, with all that frustration out there, democrats can actually work work with trump . Youve been a long time proponent of buy american. But any chance democrats will work with the president doing all of these other things when the base is so frustrated . Senator murphy its not just that the base is outraged. Its that donald trump is offering no hand of cooperation right now. So i think the chances that there is some major bipartisan breakthrough or winnowing by the day, when you have the president calling the Senate Minority leader a clown and insulting others including your home state colleague. Senator murphy who got the brunt of it yesterday. It doesnt suggest a moment where were all sit down. It doesnt look like hes prepared to extend that hand. And then, you know, it also doesnt look like the white house today has the capacity to actually put together the one, two, three, four, five steps necessary to get a big major deal on Something Like infrastructure or tax reform. So i think theoretically, will like me who have been a big part of the resistance, are still willing to work on an interest or pack change or making more sense with trade policy. I do not see he is interested in getting that done. He will bring a couple of senators over, that there does not seem to be anything that that big breakthrough moment is coming. Mr. Hohmann i understand the situation is different than 2009 but republicans made a calculated decision not to work on anything but they did earn a brand as the party of no. Democrats attacked them for not being willing to work with the president. How do democrats avoid getting that label, the party of no . Its obviously a little bit easier when trump is attacking schumer as the head clown, but how do you not just become viewed as part of the gridlock and obstruction thats preventing anything from getting done . Senator murphy i think you continue to make it clear the areas where we can forge some compromise on. So i sense President Trump a series of actions he could use to strengthen buy america laws. I asked for a personal meeting with him to talk about it. And, you know, i certainly got some grief from for my base i was offering to work with him on policies i thought was important to my state. But i think its important to make it very explicit there are possible lanes of cooperation, and then when he doesnt take those offers i havent heard anything on my letter, i havent gotten any feedback from him on what he might do to work with me when he doesnt take those offers, then i think thats effectually guards us against a claim were just engaging in obstruction. Mr. Hohmann to what extent, obviously, you have friendships with some republicans across the aisle and the senate. You were in the house. To what extent do you expect republicans are going to try and hold trump accountable . Weve seen some Senate Republicans talk about russia, which well talk about in a couple of minutes. Last night, Jason Chaffetz put out a statement criticized Kellyanne Conway for kind of pimping ivanka trumps products from the briefing room. Do you see that continuing . Senator murphy the chaffetz letter was interesting because so far, you see a willingness to engage in opposition by rhetorical flor flourish without any willingness to put that into policy. Chaffetzs letter was significant in that it was actually asking a Government Agency looking to taking steps that would have involved real repercussions. But in the senate, we havent seen that. So, yeah, a lot of members of the senate say theyre uncomfortable with the muslim ban but theres legislation pending that they could join that would rescind the ban. None of them have done so. They claim they want to take seriously the issue of russian interference in this election, but there is still no announcement of any bipartisan hearing process, nothing being done in the Foreign Relations committee to suggest theyre willing to move beyond words. The cynical part of me thinks that they want to get through these two reconciliation processes. Right, they want to repeal the Affordable Care act and get the big trickledown tax cut done and dont want trump to screw that up. So until that happens, theyre going to largely stand back and, you know, lob a couple of word bombs at him. But essentially, stay clear of any direct legislative confrontations. You know, and maybe if they get what they want done in those reconciliations, they might be a little bit more willing to stand up to him in meaningful ways. Mr. Hohmann lets talk about judge gorsuch. I guess the decision last night, the ninth Circuit Decision as you mentioned is a win for people who have been in the streets. Where do you see that case going and then what extent will that, to what extent will that ongoing case affect the Supreme Court fight . Senator murphy well, i mean, i think the administration now has a decision to make as to which route theyre going to go down, whether theyre going to go theyre going to appeal it to the Supreme Court or ask for an embank hearing. I think the chances of prevailing are very low and they likely understand that. Certainly, the way in which trump reacted certainly complicates things for judge gorsuch. He came out said what everybody would have expected, that he didnt particularly like trumps attempted bullying of judges, but it does call into question, you know, the independence of the judiciary and the ability of anyone that trump selects to, you know, truly have the ability and bandwidth to take him on. But, you know, i sort of said about his comments that, you know, my colleague revealed the other day, you know, i think theyre largely irrelevant to the question of his qualifications. The real story would have been if he had in a private meeting backed up the president s attacks on the judiciary. You would expect that any judge would find what trump said and is doing to be uncomfortable, and the real question is going to be is he a radical judge, mainstream judge, will he bring his politics to the Supreme Court . Those will be the questions that will be relevant to those of us who havent made up our mind yet. Mr. Hohmann have you had a meeting with him yet . I havent. I dont have anything scheduled. I met him quickly in passing. Mr. Hohmann so the you supported filibuster reform in 2013 when democrats had the majority. Now the Nuclear Option was invoked for nonSupreme Court nominees. Do you worry about republicans Going Nuclear on Supreme Court picks . Do you think theyre going to do it . Can it be avoided at this point . Senator murphy when i i hear republicans say that gorsuch is going to be confirmed, right, that sounds to me as if they are prepared to change the rules in order to do it. I have been a supporter of, you know, changing the rules. I think that our Founding Fathers set up a system that, you know, made it hard by design to get major change enacted. They thought carefully about where super majorities should be required and where they shouldnt and they did not require them for ordinary legislation. But i think that conversation should happen separate from one nomination or one piece of legislation. I do think it is dangerous to change the rules in order to get something done in the immediate moment. I think the right time to change the rules is when you have the ability to step back from one particular controversy. But in general, yeah, i have been a consistent supporter of getting rid of the filibuster and ill continue to be a supporter of it. Mr. Hohmann another issue coming up very soon, the labor department, andy pozners hearing, i think rescheduled five types now, coming up next week. Any normal nominee who had the problems he had would not still be a nominee. But this is a different sort of environment. You know, there is a lot of issues. I guess is this an area where you think, you know that the fact that they have delayed it so many times has raised the possibility maybe he wont be able to get confirmed, maybe he wont be able to survive two republicans defected on betsy devos after a lot of calls from constituents. Do you think at this point puzder is beatable . And can you talk about why he is a problematic nominee . Senator murphy i have no idea what the rules are any longer. It is hard for me to say. I mean, you are right. In any other year, andy puzder wouldnt have any chance at confirmation. But frankly in any other year he wouldnt have had a chance at nomination. This is this is somebody who made his name by openly mocking workers. Right, thats why he was a tv celebrity because he would come on and say pretty outrageous things about american workers. And half of his restaurants have, you know, failed to meet basic department of labor wage laws, and now we find he had a worker in his house who was undocumented. I mean, this is just a mountain of baggage that would normally sink any other nominee. But i just dont know what the rules are any longer. I mean, i do think republicans at some point are going to wake up and realize if they continue to back up a guy with 30 something Approval Ratings at 100 rate there is going to be electoral consequences for them. So if im just sort of thinking politically for republicans, you know, having voted for every single one of his nominees, probably not a good advertisement for your reelection and, yes, this guy would be the easiest for them to oppose. And, yeah, for me, on the merits, even under republican president s, traditionally, the secretary of labor has actually believed in the value of labor. And andy puzder does not. He thinks that laborers are a nuisance. And hes made no secret of the fact he would like to get rid of his workers as quickly as technology allows. That just doesnt seem to be somebody who should be the spokesman for workers in this country. If we had a department of fast food, hes your guy. But we dont. We have a department of labor. And there is probably somebody else who is better qualified. Mr. Hohmann i covered the betsy devos hearing and there is a lot of frustration there among democrats on the panel because you only not one round of questioning, only got five minutes. It was late in the day to minimize coverage. How much bad blood is there on the Committee Going into hearing next week and do you expect the same kind of tactics from the majority and the chairman . Senator murphy it was so strange. Lamar is such a straight shooter. And that committee has been a joy the last two years because it has been one of the few that has truly been functional. We passed reform of the workforce investment act, we passed a major reform and rewrite of the nations elementary and secondary education laws. So it just i think one of the reasons that we were so angry in that areas we were being shut down in our questioning is that when lamar was doing it, it must have been for a reason, right . And we discovered what that reason was, a nomination on his hand who was fundamentially unprepared. Im not sure that that hearing could have gotten much worse if we had been given a second round of questions. But clearly he was trying to protect her. And well see if he does the same thing for puzder. He claimed that he was enforcing precedent for previous hearings on secretaries of education. And so well see what the precedent tells you about questioning of secretaries of labor and whether we get a little bit more time. Mr. Hohmann speaking of the devos hearing, you were the senator who asked a question about gunfree schools. And that was what prompted now secretary devos to talk about the potential of a grizzly attack [laughter] hohmann and it was funny, she in her opening message to the Education Department made two different allusions to the grizzly joke. In her speech to Education Department staff, she said the confirmation process was a real bear. And it was clearly intentional. She could poke fun of herself a little bit. On devos, one of the rules of the senate is oversight. Youre not in the majority. But to the to all the teachers and parents who got really engaged during that fight, what is the plan for you and others to keep an eye on some of these things . She obviously didnt commit to a lot of things that are really important to democrats. You know, special education is something near and dear to your heart. And what is the strategy there . Now that she has been confirmed, shes in the department, what can you do . You cant, you know, call hearings on your own. Senator murphy yeah. I think it was important that because of that hearing, not only did democrats get upset, but republicans did as well. Even though republicans voted for her did press her to make commitments, so she, you know, ive seen reports of this, that she made commitments to senators on that committee to enforce ida, as it is currently written. She made commitments not to transfer dollars from Public School programs into private School Programs without the authorization of congress. So i think even though she didnt make the commitments in the hearing, in order to get the votes of republicans, she had to meet some of those committees afterwards. There is just a legion of millions of parents and educators that are standing by, ready to hit the streets, if she tries to bring some of her radical views inside the department and radically changes the way in which the department works. Ill give you an example of where well be watching closely. There is an office of civil rights inside the department of education, which historically been used to protect minority kids and disabled kids from discrimination. We are very worried that she is going to take that office and turn it into exactly the opposite, turn it into a pro Discrimination Office by using it to protect the religious liberty of schools to choose who they discriminate against. That would be a 180degree turn in the way that the office of civil rights works, and i will guarantee you that there will be thousands of parents and teachers outside the department of education every single week if she does that. And so this protest movement does give us leverage because betsy devos doesnt want that, right . I had a really nice meeting with her in my office that belied her performancein the hearing. I dont think she wants division between parents, teachers and the department of education be a hallmark of her four years. So thats an important piece of leverage. Mr. Hohmann yeah. Lets transition, talk about health care. Another big upcoming fight. The Health Community has jurisdiction over health care. You were in the house when the Affordable Care act passed in 2010. You were pretty involved in parts of coming up with that legislation. Where do you see this going . You mentioned republicans sort of getting uncomfortable. Lamar, the chairman of your committee, has sort of walked back some of the urgency, drawn the ire of some on the right. In talking about the urgency of repeal or lack thereof. What is your read on where this is going . And what can democrats, you know, do, i think, for a while the republican strategy was lets repeal it and then force democrats hands to get onboard with the replacement so that 20 Million People dont lose coverage. I think democrats said were not going to play along with that, and republicans have walked that back a little bit. Now there is polling that shows and 90 of people want, if there is going to be repeal, some kind of replacement to go with that. How is this going to play out, and what are democrats going to do . Senator murphy to add to that new polling this morning that shows the Affordable Care act is above water now by almost double digits, right . It is getting literally more popular by the day as people realize, you know what their life would be like if it was gone. I think it was a very important moment early on where democrats told republicans unequivocally if you break this, you own it. Right, and thats not political, right. If my 8yearold took a very expensive glass vase and threw it on the floor, right, im not terribly interested in sitting down with him and trying to tape it back together because it is not going to be as good as that vase was in the first place. And thats kind of what happens if you break the Affordable Care act. You cant put it back together in a meaningful way. So i think republicans now know that democrats are not going to participate in the replacement if they dont talk to us ahead of time about how to work through this. And i think it is important for us to hold them to all the commitments that they have made. It is really exceptional the commitments they have made. They have said from the president on down to the leadership in Congress None of the 20 million is going to lose their health insurance, that out of pocket expenses are going to go down, not up, and that your and that the insurance protections are going to remain. So i think it is important for us just to make it clear to them that were not going to help them and that were going to hold them to all of the promises that they made. And i think if we do that, the chances are increasing in likelihood that they dont do it. I mean, on inauguration day, for the congress, i would have said, 80 20 this is getting repealed. Im not sure if it is 50 50 any longer. Just because just because i think they are faced with reality of not being able to do what they said they were going to do. And what they continue to say what theyre going to do. And if thats the case, then there is a hand that we will extend to them to try to make commonsense fixes, and thats what was so astonishing about the hearing that Lamar Alexander called. He called this hearing that didnt get a lot of attention last week in which he brought a panel of experts, none of which advocated repealing the Affordable Care act. All of them advocated repairs and fixes. Most of which could be supported by democrats. And it seemed to be a very clear signal from somebody very high up in the Republican Leadership that the paradigm had shifted pretty significantly. Mr. Hohmann quickly, what are the repairs and fixes that democrats could get on board with that would make the law better . Senator murphy so i think that, you know, stabilizing the exchanges, right, are, you know, something that republicans and democrats can work on. Perhaps talking about giving a little bit more choice in benefit design i think is something that republicans and democrats can absolutely work on, trying to figure out a way to make the offerings to small businesses, the exchanges that have, you know, not worked like we had hoped for small businesses, work better, i think, is something we can get onboard with. So i think there are some bipartisan fixes here that would involve democrats giving a little, republicans giving a little. Democrats have not wanted to mess with the benefit design. I think there is a conversation we could have that would get us to a pretty productive place. I think it is unlikely that thats going to happen. But im certainly willing. Mr. Hohmann do you think there is any way republicans could figure out how to cover preexisting conditions without a mandate . Is there any way senator murphy sure, you can do it with high risk pool. But that involves a massive subsidy of the high risk pool. Tom price rolled out a bill in the house that spent 3 billion over five years. Thats not close to the amount of money that you need in order to convince insurers to offer for people that have high medical acuity. You either have to spend a ton of money, public money, to convince ensurers to enter that market or need to require that individuals who are healthy enter the pool. Those are the only two ways to guarantee that people with preexisting conditions dont get discriminated against and neither one of them is particularly palpable to the current orthodoxy again, which is why im not sure they could ever put their fingerprints on a true replacement plan that does say. The things that they say. Mr. Hohmann lets shift to \Foreign Relations, another committee youre on. I want to remind the audience, if you have questions, please tweet them using the 202live and ill see them here and we can pivot back to some domestic issues as well. There is a lot of Foreign Policy hot spots. Well start with russia, the post three of my colleagues had a scoop last night, Michael Flynn had talked with the Russian Ambassador about kind of basic about sanctions, and in some ways reassuring the russians that trump might walk back the sanctions that the Obama Administration pud put on place on them for meddling in our election. What is your reaction to that news, coming after a month and a half of categorical denials from the administration . Senator murphy shock. No, of course he did. Of course that was the context of the conversation. They very clearly advertised throughout the campaign for whatever reason they wanted to reach out and establish a new relationship, that would make sense that a way in which they would do that is use the interim to telegraph to the russians as soon as were there, things will be different, and so it absolutely makes sense that Michael Flynn made promises in those conversations. Im not sure why he would have been talking so often to the Russian Ambassador if he wasnt talking about what the platform for the relationship was going to look like postinauguration. And, listen, every single day that our russia policy remains as muddled as it does, there are consequences playing out around the globe. It doesnt matter what Nikki Haley Says in the u. N. When two days later the president of the United States casts doubt on whether the russians are even in ukraine. And what i mean by consequences is that as we speak today, the russians are advancing in eastern ukraine. As we speak today, inside the balkans, the russians are pressing their advantage further in places like bosnia and republic of serb setting off a catastrophic chain of events in the weeks and months to come. So every day that it is totally unclear what the u. S. Policy is on russia, and their effort to try to achieve a sphere of influence, russia is moving. And until we draw a line somewhere, until we tell them that there are were going to continue sanctions and grow them, russia is going to get closer to what they want, which is a little area around russia in which they run things. Theyre doing it. John mccain, lindsey graham, couple of others supporting legislation this week to codify these sanctions into law so that trump cant roll them back. Do you think thats going to happen . Do you think it is going to end up getting killed or not getting floor time because obviously that would reassure a lot of our Eastern European allies who are worried about trump being so wobbly on this issue. I mean, you know, john and lindsey have been fantastic, but their influence has, you know, not grown outside of the two of them in a sense that there have not been other republicans willing to join on. And corker, senator corker, has not shown a willingness to bring this legislation to the Foreign Relations committee. So, i not terribly optimistic am today that that legislation is going to come before the senate. I think it will be interesting next weekend, you will have the first Major International security conference in munich, looks like there will be fairly robust representation from the trump administration. And it will be interesting to see what commitments pence and mattis and tillerson make there , and whether or not after they make those commitments donald , trump tweets something out contradicting whatever they say. So, i think there is a lot of expectations built up for the munich security conference. The russians will be there, listening closely to what the administration says. And i think thats important because im not convinced there is going to be legislation legislation moving. James the point you make about trump undercutting his own people i think is an important one. A lot of republicans after the nikki haley speech said, look, the administration is taking a hard line and trump goes out two days later and just undercuts them. You have to watch what the president is doing, not just what his emissaries are. Something like sen. Murphy i think that could be shorter. Watch what the president is doing, period. And there is sort of an alternate reality playing out in republican circles today. We had this hearing yesterday on russia policy and all the republicans talked about was this great nikki haley statement. Nobody mentioned the fact that two days later trump literally , denied that russia is inside ukraine. And who is Vladimir Putin listening to . Hes not nikki haley i think will be a very, you know, important person in this administration, but lets be honest, russians are listening to donald trump, not listening to nikki haley. So we just got to be careful to , let republicans trumpet the statements of the National Security cabinet. You got to actually listen to what is saying. James lets talk about yemen. When barack obama was president , you criticized u. S. Criticized u. S. Weapons sales to saudi arabia, the saudi used in their military campaign in yemen, has exacerbated the humanitarian crisis there. Continuing on that issue, yesterday, you joined rand paul and mike lee along with al franken to request a classified briefing from the administration on our actions and objectives in yemen. One of our navy seals died. Lets talk about our yemen policy. Are you concerned about american escalation there . Do you feel like the obviously the last couple of days have devolved into this question of whether youre being disloyal to the country, or disrespectful to the troops if you criticize that policy, but there has not been really a debate about a National Debate about what americas role is in yemen. Sen. Murphy so i lose sleep at , night over our yemen policy. I think it has been a disaster for years. And ive been openly critical, openly critical of the Obama Administrations decision to support the reckless Saudi Bombing Campaign inside yemen. But i think what is happening now is even more dangerous. What was what was not widely covered in the statement that Michael Flynn made in which he told the iranians that they were on notice is that he didnt just put them on notice for the Ballistic Missile test. Inside that statement, he seemed to suggest that if the houthis inside yemen continue to attack the saudi forces, that would be an equivalent provocative action to a Ballistic Missile test, suggesting we had a new security guarantee for the saudibacked forces inside yemen. And so the stakes get higher and , higher and the potential for war and conflict with iran gets bigger and bigger. I dont think america has a dog in the fight in the yemeni civil war. The saudis are our allies, but you dont need to back every single one of your allies plays. And what is happening inside that country is as the civil war just drags on, isis and al qaeda are getting stronger and stronger. And as we saw, with the failure of that mission inside yemen, we cant simply let them grow and expect that special ops are going to be able to hold them at bay. We should have a policy of trying to stop that civil war rather than inflaming it. That is my recommendation over to administrations. Over two administrations. James do you you supported the iran nuclear deal. Do you think it can hold in this sort of climate . You got to be nervous. You do have to you have to be nervous about these series of es these series of escalator reactions that could lead to either the United States or the iranians deciding to pull out of that agreement. Sen. Murphy thats always been our worry. Our worry hasnt been that, you know, out of nowhere one side or the other would pull out. It would be a series of es ca latory moves that would force one to say that the spirit or the letter of the agreement had been broken and that would be a disaster for the United States, it would be a disaster for our allies. I appreciate the administration i think heard from enough folks theyre not going to pull out of the agreement on their own, but this could happen by accident pretty easily. James on syria a lot of , mistakes have been made in the past. Based on where we are today, what would your syria policy be . Sen. Murphy well, i wrote a piece for the maybe a month ago, talking about the lessons that should be learned here, right . We have to lie in the bed we have made. We have prolonged this conflict as a country. We have given just enough support to the rebels in order to continue fighting while not giving them enough to actually win the fight. And so, i ultimately think that u. S. Military support prolongs this conflict. I would argue that we should both u. S. Military support. That we should step back and focus our efforts on you military assistance on , rescuing people by increasing the flow of refugees into this country, continue to pursue a political and diplomatic path, but i dont see there is any u. S. Led military solution to what is happening on the ground there. If we stepped back, it may be that the proassad forces would move faster. I think we can continue to use counterterrorism and bombing efforts to strike at isis. But our support on the ground has not helped. We should withdraw it and focus on humanitarian needs. James did gabbert make a mistake we going to syria and meeting with assad . Sen. Murphy i dont think there is anything good that comes from members of the United StatesCongress Sitting down with a brutal murderistic dictator like that. James do you oppose Rex Tillersons nomination of secretary of state . It will be an incredibly important job because in a lot of ways thats the person running the department. There has been some shadow boxing in that regard, rand paul who is with you on the Foreign Relations committee has come out against the leading candidate. How contentious do you think the hearing is, or the Selection Process for this deputy and are democrats planning to put up a big fight there . I guess it depends on who gets picked. Sen. Murphy it depends on who it is. Im as concerned as rand is about the pick of abrams. I think that this is someone who continues to this day to unapologetically advertise the efficacy of the iraq war, who has lied to congress before. I have no interest in the neocons who essentially created the disaster we are living with inside the middle east coming back to power. And i think it will be a very important pick because when youre dealing with a president and a secretary of state who have no diplomatic experience, that number two position in the department of state, especially if it is someone who is an who is an experienced operator is going to have , perhaps more power than any previous deputy secretary of state. So i think there is going to be a lot of oversight and a lot of attention to this position. And i have no interest in bringing someone into that position who is just going to allow for the sort of interventionalist neoconservative crowd to be a ba cendant again in washington. James inside the state department there is the , descent channel where it goes back to vietnam, where people can articulate disagreement with the leadership of the state department, i think more than a thousand people signed on to a recent descent cable. How do you and democrat plans to how do you and democrats plan to protect some of the dissenters from being retaliated against by this administration . I hear from people in the state department that there is concern that there will be reprisals, which would be quite unusual. Are you hearing from people in the state department about these kinds of concerns and what is the plan to protect these folks . Sen. Murphy well, you know we , have a pathway to protect individuals like that. It is whistleblower protection law. That has been traditionally reserved for individuals who are trying to expose some fraud or illegal activity in the government. It does not traditionally protect those who are dissenting. But that specific channel inside the department of state, right, is, you know, is well established. And so i dont think it would be ofutside of the realm reasonableness to consider adding protections for individuals using established channels of dissent to give them some of the similar protections. So, there are legal avenues we could take to try to provide a little bit of cover for those individuals. And of course, we are all just as poorly worried about an administration that is going to tell folks that if you raise any objection, public or private, to the actions that your department or your president is taking, youll be fired. And frankly any good ceo out , there knows the importance of dissent, knows the importance of bringing in alternative voices. And you know i think a lot of , people are sort of wondering about the health of our democracy, wondering about whether we should take for granted the fact that the way we have run this country for the last 240 years will continue. And when you start hearing about these efforts to punish people for speaking out, even privately against the decisions that the president has taken, you get worried about whether, you know, were going to continue to enjoy democratic norms in the way that we have. James we have to wrap up in the next couple of minutes. There are two questions i want to get at from twitter that popped up a couple of times. Several people are asking about trumps tax returns. Thats something that obviously never released the returns. There is very little Disclosure Requirements for the president. Is that where does that stand on the list of priorities . Is there anything you all can do to draw them out on that, other than just talk about it a lot . Sen. Murphy well, i mean the , underlying question is simple. Is donald trump compromised in his relationship with russia . Is he compromised because russians have Major Investments in him that he is trying to hide . Is he compromised because russians have some compromising information on him relevant to other things he has done . And . And there are two investigations happening now in the house and the Senate Intelligence committee that are trying to find the answers to those two questions. Obviously with respect to financial conflicts, he could clear it up immediately by releasing his tax returns. Ron widen and i have a piece of legislation that would require president s and president ial candidates to release their returns, not surprisingly we dont have any republican cosponsors of that. But there are these two investigations happening that i think are very, very important. And, you know, listen, lets be honest. If Vladimir Putin were pulling the strings of this administration, for one reason or another, this is likely how the script would have played out over the first few weeks. You would have a president making moral equivalences between putins killing of journalists, and u. S. Military activities. You would have the hints and private commitments of sanctions withdrawal. You would have the clouding of russian activity inside ukraine. I hope to god that donald trump is not compromised. That he doesnt have some sort of secret relationship with russia which is guiding his policy. But if putin was pulling the strings, this is likely how it would play out which is why the , investigations in the Intelligence Committee are so important. Jason last question. A lot of people asking basically some variation of how do democrats win again . The 2016 the 2016 election wasnt just disappointing for democrats at president ial level, but the senate and house as well, a lot of statelevel races, too. There is obviously a lot of opposition to trump and that is driving this resistance movement. But what can the Democratic Party do to win again . Sen. Murphy so, you know, if you ask people in connecticut what donald trump stood for in this election, they can tell you pretty quickly. Right . He stands for a wall, he wants he doesnt want muslims to enter the United States, he wants to beat the hell out of china. If i asked him what Hillary Clinton was for, a harder time, right . I think this is the most important question for democrats. And how do wer, quit articulate what we are for . And i think thats a really important question when it comes to the resistance. Because the temptation in opposing trump will be to oppose everything. I think if youre clear about what you are for it will tell , you what to fight and what to let go. And so heres my theory of the case as to what democrats should be for. I think it has been super confusing about democrats economic messaging because half the time we talk about Economic Growth, and half the time talk about economic fairness. We have to make a choice. I argue we should be for Economic Growth. Economic fairness is a component of Economic Growth. You cant have true Economic Growth if you dont have rules of the road that allow everybody to have a chance at opportunity. But we should be talking about growing the economy, and all the ways that we are going to help grow the economy. Second, we should be a party of inclusion. We should be a party that stands for a country that accepts everybody. And all of the individual fights to protect immigrants, to protect africanamerican voting rights, fall underneath that rubric. But i think thats a pretty great way to frame the democratic message. It is simple. We are a party of Economic Growth for everybody, not just millionaires and billionaires, and we are a party of a country that includes everybody. And if we just say that over and over and over again, i think that scratches a lot of voters where they itch. It allows us to filter in our message underneath us, and will tell us the things to fight, right . Like the muslim ban. Like a big trickle down tax cut and will frankly tell us the things not to fight. Like ivanka trump and nordstroms and crowd sizes, right . [laughter] [laughter] and i think that ultimately is the key to whether democrats take power, are are we disciplined in our positive message and disciplined because of the positive message in the things we fight and the things that we perhaps let go . James senator chris murphy, thank you so much for joining us today. And thanks to everyone for watching. [applause] you can find more upcoming programs and clips from today at washingtonpostlive. Com. Thank you. Sen. Murphy appreciated. Appreciate it. History unfolds daily. In 19 79, cspan was created as televisionrvice by companies and was brought to you today and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. On afterwards, melissa fleming, chief spokesperson for they united station united nations, counts a young syrian womans journey in her book. She is interviewed by the president of refugees international. How do they feel to the point they had to leave . Spring is happening all around them and they are turning on the television. All kinds of average families in syria, but they have livelihoods and health care and they are going to school. Just going about their daytoday life. This family was not politically active. They are caught up in this excitement the other countries around us are changing, maybe things can change here. Demonstrations are starting in the street. She wouldve been 16 years old. She has a desire to see what is happening. She witnesses then that protesters are shot at. Said in a and 9 00 eastern on afterwards. President trump and the prime japan left for palm bay this afternoon. Earlier in the day, they were in washington d. C