Spending democrats blocked debate on the bill three times because it overturns obamas executive actions on immigration. Watch the discussion live on cspan, the senate on cspan two. Newly elected washington senator thom tillis discussed what he learned working in state government. This is about 45 minutes. Good morning, everyone. I guess it is afternoon now. Welcome to the Bipartisan Policy Center. I am bill hoagland, i am the Senior Vice President here at the center and it is my pleasure to welcome you all here this afternoon to kick off our new agenda setters series. For those of you who may not be familiar with the Bipartisan Policy Center, we were established in 2007 by four former majority leaders of the United States senate, senator bob dole, the late howard baker, and senator tom daschle. Our goal is to explore timely and compelling and impactful issues and policy making and politics throughout 2015. Each event will highlight policy makers and decision in Decision Making roles and some like today who have only been recently placed in that role putting forth innovative thinking about how to solve issues that challenge the country and indeed the world today. We are pleased to have senator thom tillis with us for this inaugural event. You have his bio. Elected in november, senator tillis is the junior senator from North Carolina. Senator tillis is being joined by my boss, the president of the bipartisan center. So please welcome me in joining senator tillis and jason. Jason . Thank you very much, bill. Welcome, all, to the beginning of our Agenda Setting series. Couldnt be happier than to start this series with you senator. I am confident that you will be one of the most influential new members of the class of 2014 and i think we have an opportunity today to talk a little bit about your policy or about some of the ideas and commitments you bring to this work. There is a lot of discussion today about opportunity and the challenges of opportunity in this country, and i think theres nobody who im aware of who has been elected in this last cycle who really embodies the possibilities in this country more than you. Country more than you. Im not sure most people know this, but senator tillis graduated from high school and immediately tonight work in a warehouse as a records clerk, to be able to earn the resources to get a college education. Put himself through college. While he was doing that, he worked at a number of esteemed institutions. In his mid 30s he was already an executive at Price Waterhouse coopers and i. B. M. I think the spirit of hard work is something that you can speak of not just in theory but certainly in experience. The centers senators Public ServiceCourt Reporter has followed that same kind of deliberate path. Started out at the p. T. A. Then he joined the eight years ago. [laughter] North Carolina commissioners. 2006, house of representatives in North Carolina. He was chosen by his colleagues to be the speaker of the North Carolina house and served there from 2011 to 2014. So this is a passion for Public Service and determination that the country needs. Im going to spend about 20 minutes asking some questions. Then were going to turn over the audience. I think id like to get started with an issue you spoke about quite a bit in your campaign and that is what you were hoping to get into, that there is kind of obstructionism here in washington, which i think is standing in the way of a lot of public interest. You were a management consultant, so how do you turn with an issue you spoke about this place around . I guess the thing i can look back to is what ive done as speaker of the house when i came in as a freshman in 2007. I ran against a twoterm incumbent in 2006, who was the award getter of all the conservative organizations in the state, but the fact of the matter is he wasnt very effective, and thats why i decided to run against him. It wasnt people that got the ribbons but people that got the result. So going into the legislature i effective, and thats why i spent a lot of time in my freshman year. Its nice being irrelevant. Its great being a freshman because you can spend time freshman, because you can spend time trying to find your way around. Trying to build relationships that i think will be helpful on both sides of the aisle, ive spent most of my time speaking with them. I do the Necessary Research to know where they are on policy issues. I had a great breakfast with one of the members earlier this week. I said ive on 0 of all the issues you and i are going to be in disagreement. There were some things i thought could provide us a basis for us working together. Having these kinds of conversations so that you build those relationships and recognize up front and dont mince words when youre going to have different objectives. I think right now thats what im trying to do. Im trying to get back and forth to the capitol without getting lost. Im doing that a lot now with a month having passed. But finding ways to provide leadership. If anybody doubts it, you look at the number of votes weve had over the past month. I think thats good for most sides. Ive had several discussions saying theyre glad to get out and vote, even if their emails are going to be defeated that they get the opportunity to put them forth and have discussion is healthy. I just want to be part of the group thats really getting the senate to move again, getting it to function, because i think well never go as quickly as i would like to go and as quickly as maybe i did in the house. But i think we can make a great deal of progress. A lot of that will be on a bipartisan process. During the one issue of the keystone pipeline, no matter what anybody thinks of the importance of that issue, you had an opportunity to participate in three times as many roll call volts as the entire senate through the entirety of 2014. I wonder if you can build a little bit upon what that means in terms of the chemistry of the place. Youre on the floor. Youre voting. There was some harsh exchanges but how important was that to build some of this camaraderie . I think it is enormously important. If you think about it, and youre in the minority, if you know youre going to have an opportunity to have things heard, youre going to be more likely to check your partisan tendencies in the interest of moving these things further along. So i think that the sense im getting from the members ive met with on the other side of the aisle is theyre optimistic about having the work done that they can have a meaningful role in. I was speaking to senator franken, senator whitehouse, senator merkeley, and i think they all genuinely believe that they may actually get more done under leader mcconnell than they did under senator reid over the last couple of years, and i think that may be true. That serves as a basis for us working to moving things along. You can try to make it partisan if you want to, but you can probably attenuate the policy to where you can get some things done. Progress. Touch on a couple of issues where you think theres some potential to build some momentum both with your colleagues across the caucus and also with the i think if you go down my bias really is towards Regulatory Reform. We talk about tax reform and other things we want to do, but i think if we really go back and examine some of the problems we have with Regulatory Overreach and really expose some of these areas, whether its e. P. A. Or labor, any of the other areas, in a very focused way, then you can sit down and say these regulations may have made sense in a vacuum, but they do not make sense in the context of how theyve affected businesses today. So lets just refine or clarify regulations we know will help businesses expand. And if we can do that and have a more positive, sustainable more positive, Sustainable Impact on econmic activity, it makes a whole lot of other things that are going to have to have some base business, it makes it less likely well go there because well have more of a thriving economy to do some of these tougher things. I think if you look at the issue of sequestration, i think most people realize that it was a bad idea. We all remember when we first implemented it, we all thought it wasnt going to happen. It was designed to be a bad idea. It was going to be such a bad things that it was never occur. Now its become commonplace. I havent looked at the president s budget. I dont necessarily know if his path forward is the path forward that well embrace, but i think there are a number of people on the other side of the aisle who think we have to do a better job with budgeting. Now its become commonplace. I think we have to get to the responsible task of budgeting. Its talk about committees. Youre a aaa senator, youre on three committees. You are on agricultural services, Armed Services, go little bit from there. How do you think the Republican Caucus is going to reconcile two very strong passions . How do you see that playing out through Armed Services . I think there is an interesting mix in the strategy going forward. I think you will have people at the extremes of the ideological spectrum, and they will be opposed to things that are centrist in their thinking. The people that oppose it may be on the extremes of one of our caucuses, so what we have to do is figure how to get in the middle. We have to be realistic about numbers, we dont have a veto. If we had a super majority, then obviously wed do things differently, perhaps. I think at the end of the day we have to look at what it takes to send legislation to the president s desk that can withstand a veto and also the policies that the American People want to see. Think at the end of the but were not were looking to get 60plus votes, and to do that, i think were going to have to be very patient in our approach and i think that we have so much pent up demand on the part of the people that voted for us, excited people at home that are calling me about a thousand times a week already to try to figure out how to prioritize things, but we are early in the process now. But we are worried more about Foreign Policy issues and worried about nuclear iran and all of those things moving at the same time and i dont yet have a kind of, how they fit together and create coalitions or significant differences between the two conferences. So a tough issue on defense budget, North Carolina obviously a very significant presence for fit military. I believe theres a hearing tomorrow at Armed Services looking at the issue of military pay and pensions. Its been said by some that our militarys basically become a pension benefit Health Care Company that occasionally fights a war and that the Current Trends are such that were going to have to address those personnel issues which obviously people feel very passionate about based on the great appreciation we have for our veterans and folks in active service. Do you see room on that . I think we had a panel of generals and one admiral last week, and we were talking about sequestration and the need to repeal it, and i said i believe that we need to do that because in my day job it Price Waterhouse cooper, i would never have gone into an organization and implement anything remotely similar to sequestration to reduce spending. Youve got to understand the organization. Youve got to the figure out where the efficiencies are. My question to the general who similar to sequestration to said that sequestration was creating a devastating impact on foreign Armed Services, lets separate sequestration from the more fundamental policy, do you believe that the department of defense and Armed Services are operating at 100 efficiency and then the answer is no. Then the question is, better and higher use of existing funds. Weve got to be more systematic in understanding whether its pensions, weapons systems, regardless of the category, are we actually spending to it its best and highest use understanding there are going to be political decisions that are being made. Whether it is acquisition or procurement form. Those are things we need to look at to create the curency to address pension issues where we see them or any other issues of government. I dont think weve done that. Weve been operating on 12month cycles for budgeting rid i think we have to be sophisticated and more longterm thinking. If were really going to come up with a sustainable solution. The Bipartisan Policy Center agrees with that view. I didnt read the background, either, so im glad to hear that. [laughter] on ag and judiciary, you have you have a couple optical priorities or ideas that you hope get into the conversation this year . Yeah. With agriculture, i believe im the first senate on the ag committee since jesse helms. It was one of the committees that i suggested. Its an 80 billion industry. It is an industry that is poised to grow if we implement the right kinds of policy. Some of that is promoting trade. It is also continuing to promote and Fund Research so that we get more productivity out of our Agriculture Sector. Again, i hate to sound like a broken record, but Regulatory Reform is first and foremost one of the things we deal with. If you go out and talk to these farmers, they will give you a litany of nonsensical regulations that do not provide the value commensurate to the cost to these farmers and on trade, weve got to get trade right. Weve got to expand opportunities for agricultural exports. Our farmers are prepared to do it. Some of them are making headway. A lot of people dont realize how successful North Carolina has become as an exporter of Sweet Potatoes. Who knew europe would like them . Europe is opening up as a market. We need to go out there and figure out how do we help them provide access to more markets and then how do we eliminate the regulations that literally make no sense . Its not just environmental regulations. Its workplace regulations. Sometimes immigration policies comes into the mix. Theres a number of areas we need to identify the most burdensome regulations and systematically remove them. On judiciary, it has an enormous oversight. Need to identify the most weve had the first confirmation hearings. Were trying to sort out how i will personally use that as a vehicle for things that i think need to be looked at. On your Sweet Potatoes, anything you can boil is a sure thing in the u. K. So think about some other options. [laughter] in the south its anything you can fry. [laughter] so challenging issue that the congressmans been working on quite a bit is immigration. The nexus between judiciary and ag, a lot to do there. The debate was moving in a constructive, kind of collision of ideas and then it just unraveled. Now i think were years back to kind of angry rhetoric on both sides. You see anything that can bring the debate back together . Well, i think the problem is, at least from afar, when senators or members of congress have tried to get together on Immigration Reform, they let it go beyond a scope that i think keeps enough people on board. I permanently believe that we well, i think the problem is, focus first on border security. The reason i believe that is if we can come up with a credible way to reduce the growth of the illegally present population first, we establish some credibility with the American People. But even more importantly, we stabilize the problem that we then need to go back and systematically address. I think when we go about doing that, its going to put people out of their comfort zone on both sides of the aisle. But we have to be realistic about Immigration Reform that doesnt embrace either extremes of the points of view that are out there. I think you do in it an iterative fashion. The biggest problem that people are having is that people are thinking that one single legislative matter is going to solve the illegal immigration problem in this country. But thats been a theres a very long, welldocumented bipartisan history of failure when theyve tried to do that. So now i think we need to do it in a more systematic way. Start with sealing the border and then again begin to look at the illegally present population and determine how you can come to some kind of closure on it. Its not going to be done in a bill or done in a year. I think you could nap out a strategy and sort of explaining to the American People, my supporters and my detractors exactly how you would go about doing it. First and foremost, i think you take a lot of it out of the issue if you seal the borders. I think the southern border, i think it is relationships with mexico, i think its sealing mexicos southern border. 80 of people coming across the border now are not from mexico. Then once you seal it, i think you build on the credibility to address the population thats here. Im going to ask one more questions, so yall can think about how you might jump in in a minute. Minute. That is reflecting back on your campaign, which was a remarkable campaign, not only obviously your success, but you know this. I dont know if anybody else knows this, but it was the most Expensive Senate campaign in history. My understanding is 115 million to 120 million. Yeah. Youre a heavily vested individual. Of that well, twothirds of it was riding on the other alternative. [laughter] good point. Im sorry. Of the overall resources, good point. Im sorry. Though, i think about 90 million to 120 million came from right. Other sources. Realizing the Supreme Courts position on free speech and the limitations therein, any thoughts about how you could make it assume youll be doing this again in six years, how you can improve on the system . You know, i think that the that thirdparty money is a reality. I think that theres something to be said for some level of increased transparency and disclosure. I was having this discussion request senator whitehouse last week during the vote, and in a strange way, i think the fact that about 80 million of the 115 million that was spent was against me ultimately worked against my opponent. I think people got burned out. I tell you what. I woke up on wednesday morning the day after the elections, and i got misty eyed when i saw a toothpaste commercial, because i mean, for a year, the first negative attack ad that was run against me was the week after thanksgiving in 2013. [laughter] 7. 5 million by third parties on the other sides of the aisle before the primary. But i think its a reality. I think we have to do a little more to disclose the sources but im not one who says it all needs to be shut down. I think the Supreme Court has spoken. So what you now do is try to figure out how through disclosure the way theyd go about communicating things. Because its really theres really some ugly stuff out there. There were things done by third parties that were ostensibly supporting us that were terrible. Its a center right state center left state, depending on the issue. I think that the unaffiliateds which is the growing segment of of the voting population get turned off by that. In states like North Carolina, it may work against them. All right. So we have about 15 minutes. We rarely have shy audiences here at the b. P. C. , but if you could raise your hand, we have a couple of mic running around. One here and one there. Theres a mic. Patrick wilson for the babcock and wilcox company. Good to see you. Ill pitch this question to you because i think its topical and timely. What could we do about tax reform . This is an issue you talked about during the campaign. Given what you said about the Regulatory Burden on american businesses, it makes it harder for us to sell internationally. I wonder what you think the prospects are of taking care of that today in congress. We have two different perspectives on tax reform, the president , and the current congress, the leadership of the congress. We did tax reform in North Carolina, not in our first term but in our second term. We simplified it, went from 44th in our tax burden to 16th. A lot of that was through simple indication but it was also through half a billion dollars in spending cuts. With tax reform its not only changing the way the tax code works. I think most people are assuming there will be a reduction in the tax burden. What ive heard from the president ive not read his Budget Proposal sounds more as much focused on how to derive more rev flew an economy that i think needs to have more money moving through the private sector. Thats why i feel strongly that we need to work more on policies that can improve Economic Activity so that you can make tax reform an easier thing to deal with. Never going to be simple. I tell you, as i told everybody in North Carolina. Everybodys for tax reform. Everybodys for broadening the base. Everybodys for lowering the rate except for everyone wanting that one exception thats righteous for this sector that they happen to represent. Its very, very challenging. Its almost impossible to do with bipartisan support or both parties in charge of both ends of the street. So i think tax reform to me, i think sweeping tax reform this year, im not speaking to the leadership. Ive not had a discussion with them, but it seems unlikely to me because of the challenges and because the president is coming at this from a different perspective, one that raises revenue. And i dont happen to support that. I still believe that we have a debt that we have to deal with. So reducing revenues, even if you were to reduce spending, youve got to come up with a credible way to start retiring the debt. So even if you reduce spending it raises the question of how much would that actually translate into a reduced tax burden. Weve got to spend a lot of time looking at that and figure out if weve got similar philosophies in both the house and senate and then sufficient support from the minority caucus to get it through. I would handicap it as a big challenge year. The other problem you have is a political one. Tax reform to me is something that has to be implemented at least a year before an election. And the reason for that, when we did tax reform, we took our person we had a five we had a six, seven, and 7. 75 tax personal income tax system in North Carolina. We simplified it, brought it down to 5. 75. We also lowered the sales tax by a penny, or 20 if you looked at the base. But we knew that if we implemented that and going in to an election year, then people were not going to believe that you actually had a reduced tax burden. And you would not you would have basically been exposing yourself in a political cycle. We implemented it last year, so this past april, people saw the benefits. They saw their that their withholding was either lower or their refund checks were larger. Well, you cant implement something in january of this year or july of next year, and i think go through a cycle where the American People would absolutely be able to see that it benefited them, so you got to work on timing as well. Another question in the back . And the mike is being run to you. Hence the term mike runner. hi. Im from the center for elder care. Youre on the Senate Committee on aging. Wanted to have you comment a bit on that. We face doubling number of elders in the next two decades one of the next challenges for the country. North carolinas had some very interesting experiments with primary care and pharmacy. On the other hand, our dependence on families is becoming pretty thin as families are smaller and poorer. What do you see as the priorities for your service on the committee on aging . Im excited to be on the committee and im particularly excited to follow the lead of senator collins as the chair. I have not spent a lot of time talking with we had our organizational meeting last week, the fastest Committee Meeting i was ever in. Voted on the budget and got back to other votes. It literally lasted 10 minutes. Theres a lot of things that we can work on that can bend the curve and provide more resources. I have a particular interest in alzheimers and dementia because ive personally experienced it and i went back and took some courses on it to become a better care giver for my grandmother who was diagnosed with alzheimers at a relatively young age, but investing in research so that making the cost of providing support to elders young age, but investing in higher than it has to be is something im interested in learning more about and finding out how aging weighs into that. I think when you get into the discussion of entitlement reform and other things, ive had people come up to me i had a lady come up to me in western North Carolina. She said i couldnt support you because youre going to end youre going to end medicare. And i said, well, maam, ill be honest with you. I talked to my mom about that. She said i couldnt do it. [laughter] you know, i think a part of what we have to do is recognize that theres a promise been made out i talked to my mom about that. There. But how do you it goes back to the discussion on pension reform and a number of other things. How do you do things in a way a that will fulfill the promise that youve made and give maybe the next generation of people time to deal with the more sustainable new model . And i think most people im 54, so i would probably be a part of that group that may have sustainable new model . To look at medicare and Social Security a little bit differently than lets say people who were four or five years away from possibly qualifying for one program or another. But i think that we have to look at that, so that first we can reduce the fear among the seniors population, that generally there are people out there, in part, because a lot of the thirdparty money being spent, who think its all going to be taken away. I think we have to go and tackle that. Aging plays a role. Obviously. There are a number of other committees, it would fall under committees, it would fall under that jurisdiction. I think entitlement reform is something weve got to get serious about. Im afraid there are promises that have been made that we cant keep at current course and speed. Its viewed by seniors as critical to their lives. I look forward to working on it and see how aging weighs into it. The committee, i guess. Its viewed by seniors as we have time for a couple more questions. On this side . Thank you. From the madison coalition. I believe you may be unique correct me if im wrong. You may be the only former speaker of the house who was just elected to the senate, and that gives you unique perspective. And i wonder what you think about the idea that sometimes bipartisan cooperation is easier to achieve among speakers and Senate Residents president s of different states than it is among the house and senate in washington. And that youd talked about this problem of Regulatory Reform as widespread concern around the country. Two to one, voters dont like what they see. What do you think of the idea that in the same way states got congress to propose the bill of rights to limit federal power, that states could do what five state legislative chambers have already done, which is to urge congress to propose a constitutional amendment that would require congress to approve federal agents instead of being dictated by bureaucrats from washington . I think there may be something to that. What is happen now, were trying to disallow regulations. Its consistent with what we did in North Carolina. When we came in 2011, our first path of Regulatory Reform was to require a Business Case for the regulation so that the cost, whether it be taxpayer cost or cost to an industry to be commensurate with the benefit, whether its Workplace Safety or environmental improvement, whatever it may be. In many cases i think there will be a valid argument for it, but that Business Case has to be developed and there has to be a consultation with the state of North Carolina. I think that until that could potentially be put into place at the federal level, you can kind of use that as a way to go back to fair thinking members and say, lets talk about how these regulations are affecting your state, your constituent for no great gain and use that as bipartisan support to repeal regulations that have gone too far. Its worked in North Carolina. I dont believe its a coincident that North Carolinas Economic Activity is outpacing every other state in the southeast. I dont think its inconsistent that North Carolina is ahead of South Carolina on unemployment. I think it was through some of the systematic approach that weve used for responsible Regulatory Reform. And incidentally, and its not always its doing it in clawing it all back. Its doing it in a reasonable fashion. North carolina is the first state in the nation to combat cole ash. We got all the stake holders together. Power companies, and i think we got it right. We balanced the regular. There was a lot of people who were concerned because we had the coal ash bill on the dan river that we would just overreach and i refused to let that happen. I said we want to use the same frame work that weve told the regulators in North Carolina that they have to follow for us to solve the problem, but not just all of a sudden run based primarily on emotions and maybe the attention we were getting from a special interest group. I believe that regulatory policy will be adopted by other states. Another question rights here . Senator, i was curious about your views on transparencies. I represent the ship recycling industry. We asked the government for documents and the government said no. We went back and said but you told us to them. I guess the question is were scratching our head and saying it doesnt make any sense. What can be done to improve the situation regarding transparencies of other documents for the business industry. I think we have to do a lot. We also have to be mindful that there are people out there who abuse these requests as well. And so you got to balance its very difficult to do. Weve got this in North Carolina. After i became speaker, we had there are people out there who transparency we had document requests for just an unbelievable number of areas that we had little or nothing to do with, so they seemed like they were just a part of a chess game that was being played versus a legitimate request for transparency. We need to figure out how you could do it, what sort of oversight or maybe even under independent review of requests to try and get to what the motives are. If somebody wants a document give it to them but there may , have to be a cost to it. A lot of times legitimate requests may actually be very revealing and important to the American People, get all caught up in the other ones. I think its a problem. I think that sometimes Even Congress cant get the documents that they want. I was just watching cspan watching a house member complaining about documents that a Congressional Panel has requested that they cant get. Watching a house member so i feel the pain of people wanting to get information they thinks really important that they cant get. Time for a final question over here. And the senator will be here for the next six years. [laughter] we appreciate your Sweet Potatoes over in the u. K. Buy more. When you were talking about agriculture you mentioned the need to expand exports. I wanted to ask you about your views on trade legislation starting with authority to negotiate but also the specific partnership and the european negotiation as well. I think t. T. A. Is an area where we may end up having the opportunity to work on a bipartisan basis. When you saw the president mention that in the state of the union, i think he probably got more of a positive reaction from our side of the aisle than his own. I think its important. I think t. P. P. Is important. I think trade agreements were working out with europe are important, particularly for agriculture. The world likes american products. Sources that they could have they think its one of the safest food sources that they could have access to. And i think that we need to build on that North Carolina has a tremendous opportunity to grow its Agriculture Sector to 120 billion. If we were able to have lower cost access to other markets. And i would support it. I would support the t. P. A. I thank all of you for joining us. Think you got a sense that we have a new senator in this town who is both eloquent and substantive. Usually you get one or the other. Its wonderful when you have them in a single package. Can i share one little sure. Just to give you an idea where my bias is when it comes to Regulatory Reform. Its wonderful when you have them in a single package. This dates back to i was in the minority still, so i was the minority whip. This would have been around 2010. And i was having a discussion because i really do believe that you can get regulation toss a point where you preserve the environment, you keep the workplace safe. You can do all that. We want to. Theres no republican here i hope that theres no republican or democrat here that has run for office so that they could destroy the environment or make sure their children couldnt drink clear water. It doesnt make sense. But i was having this discussion with someone and we were at a starbucks in my district. And we were talking about certain regulations where i felt like maybe you should allow businesses to opt out. Let an industry or business opt out as long as they indicate through proper disclosure, through advertising, employment literature, whatever else, theres this level of regulations that may be maybe theyre on the books but maybe you can make a marketbased decision as to whether or not they should apply to you. She said, i cant believe that. She said opting out and at that time we were sitting back at a table that was near the restrooms. One of the employees just came she said, i cant believe that. Out. She said, for example, dont you believe that this regulation that requires this gentleman to wash his hands before he serves your food is important . Said matter of fact, i think its one that i can illustrate the point. I said i dont have any problem with starbucks choosing to opt out as long as they post a sign saying we dont require our employees to wash their hands after using the restroom. The market will take care of that. Thats one example. But then let them decide. Thats probably one where every business that did that would go out of business, but i think its good to illustrate the point, that thats the sort of mentality we need to have to reduce the Regulatory Burden on this country. Were one of the most regulated nations in the history of the planet. I think if we go about it in a commonsense way, that that solves a lot of problems that make these other big problems imminently more eminently more easy to solve. Im not sure im going to shake your hand. [laughter] but i want to express our appreciation to senator tillis for joining us today. [applause] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] next, nancy pelosi talks about jobs, the economy, and middle class initiatives. Then, a Senate Hearing on the future of the Detention Center in guantanamo. Then, Darrell Waltrip at the National Prayer breakfast. On the next washington journal, Grover Norquist will discuss the tax proposal put forth in the 2016 budget request. Patrick terrell of the American Immigration counsel looks at the