When the senate is back in session tomorrow morning at 10 00 a. M. Eastern, live coverage and sees fit. Up next, conversation with connecticut senator chris murphy undemocratic priorities in a republicancontrolled congress. We sat down recently with the washington post. Thank you so much everyone for being here. Happy friday. We have a great a great turnout. And thank you to everyone joining us online and on cspan. A reminder before we get started that well take a few questions on twitter. If you tweet using the 202 live, i will see your questions appear. And thank you to chris murphy for joining us. Been in the senate since 2012 in the 12 in the house for six years before that. Before that. Youre on two committees, and help which is Health Education and labor and Foreign Relations. Two issues that have been at the core this week. I think they will be for some time. We have a lot we want to cover. I want to Start Talking about the resistance as it is starting to be called. Then i want i want to talk about some policy, especially that your committees oversee, whether its healthcare education or Foreign Policy issues. Later in the conversation. You are at the senate until 2 3. I have become nocturnal. Its like the third night in a row. I heard that you are obsessed with diet mountain dew. To help you get through. I know how tired you are soon i guess kind of a warm timeout do. You put that down. When you were elected you are the youngest senator. Now you think youve been out of by one or two guys. Youve youve proven your stamina this week. I want to start with a question. You are at the senate basically pulling all nighters three days this week. We dont have another election for almost two years. This weekend we heard from planned parenthood and their planning mass protests around the country. It will be the fourth weekend in a row for Major National activism by critics of the president. How do you keep this going . Can this be sustained through naches 2018 to 2020 . And the contacts i ask this in his you have worked hard this week but youve also lost some things were passive divorce got confirmed and tom price got confirmed. I am exhausted. It is hard hard to understand how the space continues. But i dont think we have any other choice. And i think although we lost nominations this week that were not unexpected, there is a feeling amongst those coming out that they are meaningful and that we can see intangible ways results. Clearly these the judicial decisions on the ban i keeping people coming out, im not saying its organized protest is what led those decisions, but theres stuff you talk about where youre in agreement. Is there realistic chance that the democrats will work and are doing other things . Its not just that the bases outrage, donald trump is offering no handoff cooperation right now. The chance that there some major bipartisan breakthrough when you have the president of the United States calling the minority minority leader of the senate a clown when hes insulting other members of the minority caucus on a regular basis. Including the colleague. It just doesnt suggest theres going to be a moment in which we are all sitting down. It doesnt look like were prepared to extend that hand. It also doesnt look like the white house today has the capacity to actually put together the one, two, three or four steps to get the big deal on infrastructure tax reform. Theoretically people like me who have been a big part of the resistance are still willing to work on infrastructure package or work on strengthen the laws. I just dont see he is truly interested in getting that done. Hovering democratic there doesnt seem to be anything for that. I understand that is different than 2009 and they made a cake lady decision not to work with him on anything. They did earn a brand of the party and democrats attack them for not being able to work with the president. How did they avoid getting that label, the party of no. Obviously its a little easier when schumer is the head but how do not become viewed as part of the gridlock and obstruction preventing anything from getting done . You continue to make clear the areas that we can to my sense President Trump a series of executive actions i asked for a personal meeting with him. I said got some grief that i was offering to work with him. But that was important in my state. I think it is important to make it. Explicit that there are possible ways of cooperation, and when he doesnt take those offers, ive not heard anything on my letter, i have not gotten any feedback from him on what he might do work with me. When he doesnt doesnt take those offers, then i think that it affectionately guards is against the claim that we are just engaging in obstruction. I beastly you have friendships or some republicans across the island center. Here in the house. Its something republicans talk about, right now in their time Kellyanne Conway talking about of evocative trumps clothing line. It the chamber thought it was interesting. What we have seen so far no willingness to engage without willingness to put in policy. It was significant in that its a Government Agency that would have real repercussions. In the senate we havent seen it. There is legislation pending that would rescind the ban, not have done so. They all claimed that they want to take seriously russian interference and theres still no announcement of any bipartisan hearing conference this part of me they want to get through these two reconciliation processes they want to repeal the Affordable Care act they dont want trump to screw that up so until that happens theyre going to largely stand back and mob a couple of word bombs at him. Essentially they will stay clear of any truck legislative confrontation. If they want to get done in those reconciliations than they might be willing to stand up to them in meaningful ways. Lets talk about judge neil grosuch, the ninth circuit was a win for people who have been in this, where do you see that case going . What extent will that ongoing case affect your Supreme Court selection . I think the administration now has the decision to make as to which route theyre going to go down. If theyre going to have it at the same court her ask for it, but i think their chances of prevailing are very low. They likely understand that. The way in which trump has reacted certainly complicates things for the judge. He came came outside whatever we wouldve expected that he didnt like trumps and bolting of judges, but it does call into question the independence of the judiciary and the ability of anyone that trump selects to truly have the ability and bandwidth to take him on. I sorta said about his comments that my colleague revealed the other day that theyre largely irrelevant to the question of his qualifications. It would be whether if he had backed up the president s attack youd expect that any judge would find what trump said uncomfortable in the real question is its theoretical judge seeking to bring his politics to the Supreme Court, those questions. Have you had a meeting with him yet . I have not. I met him very quickly. So you supported and 20000 and in 2014 than on Supreme Court nominees, do you worry about republicans Going Nuclear on Supreme Court pics . To think theyre going to do it, can be it be avoided at this point . When i hear republicans say that neil grosuch is going to be confirmed, that sounds to me as if they are prepared to change the rules in order to do it. I have been a supporter of changing the rules. I think our Founding Fathers set up a system made it hard by design to get major change in active. They thought very carefully about where super majority should be required in washington. They did not require them for ordinary legislation. I think that conversation should happen separate from one piece of legislation ii dont think you should change the roll to get something done in the immediate moment. I think the right time is when you have the ability to step out from one particular controversy. In general, i have been a consistent supporter of getting rid of the filibuster and i will continue. Another issue coming up is the Labor Department i believe its been rescheduled a few times now coming up next week. Any normal nominee would not still be a nominee. But this is a different sort of environment. Theres a lot of issues. As a scenario where you think the fact that they have the 70 times raised the possibility that maybe he will not get confirmed to maybe wont be survive to republicans deflected on the five, do you think at this point hes beatable and can you talk a little bit about why . I have no idea what the rules are any longer. Its hard for me to say. Youre right. In any other year they would have a chance at confirmation. Franklin any other year he went have a chance at nomination. This is someone who made his name by openly mocking workers. Thats why he was a celebrity. If you would come out and say outrageous things about american workers. And then mean his restaurant has failed to meet department of wage laws. This is a mountain and i just on oh at the rules are any longer. I do think at some point theyre going to wake up and realize that if they continue to back up a guy with thirtysomething Approval Ratings at 100 rate, theres going to be electoral consequences for them. So fun just thinking politically for republicans having voted for every single one of his nominees, its probably not a good advertisement for reelection. Yes, this guy would be the easiest for them. And for me on the merits, even under a republican president the secretary of labor has a believed in the value of labor. And andy andy does not. He thinks that labors are nuisance, and to the fact that he would like to get rid of his workers as quickly as technology allows. That doesnt seem to be a good spokesman for workers in this country. If you had a department of department of fast food, hes your guy. But we have a department of labor and theres probably someone else qualified. I covered the betsy devos and you have one round of questioning, and this late in the day to minimize coverage, how much bad blood is there on the Committee Going in and do you expect the same kind of tactics from the majority of the chairman. It was strange. That committee has been a joy the last two years because its one of the few that spend functional weve had the workforce investment act, i think one of the reasons they were so angry and that hearing that we are being shut down and are questioning is that when theyre doing it it must have been for a reason. We discovered what that reason was. He had a nominee on his hand who is fundamentally unprepared for that hearing. I was unprepared to be secretary of education. That came out quickly. By the end of the hearing we figured out why he was trying to limit our questioning. Im not sure that hearing could have gotten much worse if we have been given a second round of questions. But clearly he was trying to protect her. Well see if if he does the same thing. He claimed that he was enforcing precedented or previous hearings on secretaries of education. We will see what that tells you about secretaries of labor and whether we get a little bit more time. With regards to that hearing you are the senator who asked the question about gun free schools. That was what prompted secretary divorce to talk about a grisly attack and it was funny, in the opening message she made two different allusions, and especially the education staff she said that the confirmation process was a real bear and it was clearly intentional. She poked fun fun of herself a little bit. One of the rules is over say coming out in the majority, tell the teachers and the parents who got engaged in there, whats the plan for you and others to keep an eye on some of these things, she did not commit to a lot of things that are really important to democrats. Special education special education is something near and dear to your heart, what is the strategy there now that she has been confirmed, what can you do . You can call hearings on your own. What 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 presser to make commitments, acting reports of this she make commitments to enforce as it was currently written. She made made commitments not to transfer dollars to Public School dollars without the authorization of congress. Even though she did not make the commitments in the hearing, in order to get the votes she had to get some of those committees afterwards. Theres 1,000,000 parents and educators that are standing by ready to hit the street if she tries to bring some of her radical views inside the department. And radically changes the way in which the department works. I will give you an example of where well be watching closely. Theres an office of civil rights which is historically the news to protect minority kids and disabled kids from discrimination. We are worried turned it into exactly the office and turn it into a pro Discrimination Office to talk about religious liberty of schools to choose who they discriminate against. That would be a 180degree turn in the way the office of civil rights work. I will guarantee you that therell be thousands of parents and teachers outside the department of education every single week if she does that. So, this protest movement does give us leverage. They dont want that, i had a nice meeting with her in my office. I dont think she wants to have division between parents, teachers and the department of education be the hallmark of her four years. Thats an important piece of leverage. Lets talk about healthcare, another big upcoming fight, you are in the house when the Affordable Care act passed in 2010, youre involved in parts of coming up with that legislation. Where do see this going . You mentioned republicans with the chairman of your committee a sort of walked back some of the urgency and talking about the urgency of repeal or lack thereof, what is your read on where this is going and what can democrats do . I think for while the republican strategy was lets repeal it and force democrats hands to get on board so 20,000,000 people does not lose coverage. I think they said we are not going to play along with that. Republicans have pulled that back a little bit. And now 20 of people are going to say theres can be some replacement with it what are democrats gonna do . Theres a new policy say in the Affordable Care act is above water by almost double digits. It is giving giving literally more popular by the day as people realize what their life would be like if it was gaunt. I think it was an important moment early on when they told republicans that if you break it you own it. And thats not political. If my 8yearold took a glass boss and threw it on the floor im not interested in sitting down and trying to tape it together because its not going to be as good as it was in the first night. Thats what happens if you break the Affordable Care act. You can put it back together in a meaningful way. Meaningful way. I think republicans know that theyre not can i participate in the placement. I think its important to hold them to the commitments they may. Its really exceptional the commitments. They said from the president down to the leadership in congress that no one is going to lose their health insurance. The outofpocket expenses are going to go down not up. And that the insurance protections are going to remain. I think its important to make it clear to them that we will not help them we are going to hold them to the promises they made. I think if we do that the chances are increasing in likelihood that they dont to that. On Inauguration Day for congress i wouldve said, 80 20 this thing is getting repeal. Im im not even sure if its 5050 any longer. Just because i think they are faced with reality of not being able to do what they said theyre going to be if thats the case, theres theres a hand that we will extend to them to try to make commonsense fixes. Thats. Thats what was astonishing about the hearing. He called the hearing that trinket attention last 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. Seemed to be a clear signal signal from someone high up in Republican Leadership that the paradigm had shifted significantly. What are the repairs and fixes that democrats could get on board with . I think stabilizing these exchanges are something republicans and democrats can work on. Perhaps talking about giving more choice and benefit design is something republicans and democrats can absolutely work on. Trying to figure out a way to make offerings to Small Businesses, the exchanges may not work the way and we had hope for Small Businesses work better. I think its something we can get on board with. I think there is bipartisan fixes that evolved democrats given a little and democrats have not wanted to mess with the design. I think theres a conversation we can have that will get us through a productive place. I think its unlikely that will happen. What im willing. To think theres any way republicans can figure out existing conditions without a mandate . You can do it with a high risk pool but that involves a massive subsidy of the high risk pool. Tom price they wanted to reach out and establish a new relationship that would make sense. A way in which they would do that that as soon as they are there it makes sense that Michael Flynn im not sure why if theyre talking about with a platform for the relationship is going to look like. Listen, everything will 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. When two days later the president of the United States cast doubt on whether the russians are even in the ukraine. As we speak today, the russians are in dancing in eastern ukraine. As we speak today, inside the balkans the russians are pressing their advantage for the places like bosnia and others potentially set enough catastrophic chain of events in the weeks and months to come. Every day that it is totally unclear what the u. S. Policy is in russia and the effort to achieve a sphere of influence, rushes moving. Until we draw a line and tell them were going to continue sanctions and grow them, rushes going to get closer to what they want, which is a little area around russia in which they run things. They are doing it, they are moving right now. John mccain, lindsey graham, few others supported legislation to codify the sanctions into law so they cannot, do you think its can happen . You think itll end up getting killed . Obviously that would reassure our Eastern European allies who are worried about jumpy and wobbly on this issue. John and lindsay have been fantastic. But their influence has not grown outside of the two of them, and a sense that there have not been other republicans willing to join on. Senator corker has not shown willingness to bring this legislation before the Foreign Relations committee. Im not optimistic today that the legislation is going to come before the senate. I think itll be interesting next weekend youll have the first major conference in munich. It will be be interesting to see what commitment pens and tellers and make their and whether or not after they make those commitments and donald trump tweet something out contradicting what they say. I think theres a lot of stuff built up to that. I think thats in part because i not convinced theres going to be legislation movement. The point you make about trump undercutting his own people is a very important one. A lot of republicans say look, theyre taking a hard line line and then trump goes out two days later and undercuts them. You kinda have to go with her president is doing. I think you have to watch what the president is doing. Theres an alternative reality thats playing out in republican circles today. We had a hearing on russian politics and everything thats talked about was this great nikki haley statement. Nobody mention the fact that trump literally denied that rushes inside ukraine. Who is Vladimir Putin listening to . Lets be honest, theyre listening to donald trump and theyre not listening to nikki haley. So we just have to be careful to let him trumpet the national security,. When barack obama was president you criticize weapon sales to saudi arabia. And they have access pervaded the humanitarian crisis there. Continuing on that issue you joined rand paul and mike lee to request a classified briefing from the administration on our actions and objections in yemen. One of our navy seals died, lets talk about our yemen policy. You concerned about american escalation there . To you feel like obviously the last couple of days have evolved into this question of whether youre being disloyal to the country are disrespectful to the troops if you criticize that policy. There has not been a National Debate about what americas role is. I cannot sleep at night over the mm policy. Ive been openly critical of the policy for years. Ive been critical about obamas decision to support this inside yemen. I think whats happening now is even more dangerous. What was not widely covered in the statement that Michael Flynn me and what she told the uranians they were on notice is that he did not just put them on notice for the Ballistic Missile test, he seemed to suggest that if the who these inside yemen continue we have to line the bed that we have made. We have have prolong this conflict as a country. We have just enough support for the rebels in order to continue fighting. To actually win the fight i would argue that we should pull u. S. Military support, that we should step back and focus our efforts on humanitarian assistance in rescuing people by increasing the flow of refugees into this country. Continue to pursue a political and diplomatic path, but i dont see that there is any u. S. Led military solution to what is happening on the ground. If we step back and may be that the forces would move faster. I think well continue to use counterterrorism embalming efforts to strike at isis. Our support on the ground is not helping a we should withdraw it and focus on humanitarian needs. Did make a mistake by going to syria . I dont think theres anything good that comes from a member of the United States Congress Sitting down with a brutal, and murder like that. Were waiting to find out who the deputy secretary of state is going to be. Its important job because in a lot of ways the person running the department theres been shadowboxing in that part. Rand paul who is with you on the former Relations Committee came out as a leading candidate. How contentious do you think the hearing is are the election process for this deputy is entered democrats planning on putting up a big fight there . It depends on who it is. I am as concerned as it is about the pic of abrahams. As someone who continues to this day on apologetically advertise the efficacy of the iraq war. He has lied to congress before. I have no interest in the neocons who created the disaster we are living with inside the middle east could be back to power. I think it will be an important pic. When youre dealing with dealing with the president and and secretary of state have no diplomatic experience, that number two position in the department of state, special if its someone whos a serious operators going to have more power than any previous deputy secretary of state. I think there will be oversight to this and i have no interest in bringing someone into that position who will just allow for the neoconservative doubt. And said department theres a thing called the defense channel that goes back to vietnam and people can articulate disagreement with the state department. More than 1000 people stay signed on to a recent dissent. How do you and democrats plan to protect some of those dissenters from being retaliated against from this administration . I hear from people at the state department that theres concerned therell be reprisals which would be quite unusual. Are you hearing from people in the state department about these concerns are one of the plan to protect these folks . We have a pathway to protect individuals like that, as whistleblower protection law. Thats. Thats been reserved for individuals are trying to expose some fraud or illegal activity in the government. Its not been used to protect those who are dissenting. But that channel inside the department of state is wellestablished. I do not think it is outside the realm of reasonableness to consider adding protections for individuals for using established channels of dissent to give them similar protections. There certainly are legal actions to provide cover for those individuals. Of course we are all desperately worried about an administration that will attack folks that if you raise any objection, public or private to the actions that your department or president is taken you will be fired. Frankly, any good ceo out there knows the importance of dissent and knows the importance of bringing in alternative voices. A lot of people are wondering about the health of our democracy and wondering if we should take for granted the fact that the way we have run the country for the last 240 years will continue. Would you start hearing about efforts to punish people for speaking out even privately against the decisions the president is taking you get worried about whether we will continue to enjoy democratic norms and the way we have. We need to wrap up in the next few minutes. Theres a few questions i want to get a. Several people are asking about trumps tax return. That is something he never release the returns, theres very little Disclosure Requirements for the president. Where does that stand of the list of priorities . Is there anything you can do to draw him out on the other than just talk about it a lot . The underlying question is simple, is that donald trump compromised and his relationship with russia . Is a compromise because russia has Major Investments in him that hes trying to hide . Is a come from eyes because russians have some confirmation information on him . Relevant to other things he has done. There are two investigations happening now in the house and Senate Intelligence committee. Ron and i have a piece of legislation that would require president s and president ial candidates to release the returns. Listen, 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 hinton 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 secret relationship with russia that is guiding his policy. If if putin was pulling the strings this is likely how pullout which is why the investigations are so important. The last question, the 2016 election wasnt just a disappointment for democrats of the president ial level but the senate and house as well, a lot of statelevel races us well. There is opposition to trump and that is driving this resistance movement. What can the Democratic Party do to win again . If yes people in connecticut what donald trump is good for this election they can tell you quickly that he stands for wall, he doesnt want muslims to enter the United States, he wants to beat the hell out of china. If i asked what Hillary Clinton was for it theyd have a harder time. I think this is the most important question for democrats, what are we for and how to we clearly articulated. Thats an important an important question when it comes to resistance. The temp tatian and opposing trump is to oppose everything. If you are clear about what youre for it will tell you what to fight what to let go. Heres my theory is what we should before. I think its been super confusing about democratic economic messaging. Half the time we talk about Economic Growth and half the time economic bearishness. I would say we have to have to do Economic Growth and economic fairness is a part of that. But we should be talking about growing the economy and all the ways we are going to help grow the economy. Second, second, we should be a party of inclusion. We should be a party that stands for a country that excepts everybody. All of the individual fights to protect immigrants and africanamerican Voting Rights fall under that rubric. I think thats a great way to frame the democratic message. Where party of Economic Growth for everybody not just millionaires and billionaires and where party that includes everybody. If we just say that over and over again, i think that scratches a lot of voters where they itch. We can filter messages underneath and will tell us the things to fight like the muslim veil, like a trickledown tax cut and it will tell us what not to fight like nordstrom same crowd sizes. I think that ultimately zacchaeus to whether they take power, are we are we disciplined in our positive message and are we disciplined because of that and the things we fight and let go. Tonight and cspan2 janet yellen aneil gorsuch meets with senators on capitol hill. And the Senate Debates the repeal of an Obama Administration regulation on firearm background checks. In her testimony before the Senate Banking committee, Federal Reserve board chair janet yellen said, the fed might raise rates in its march meeting. She bid for the Community Today to purchase present her report,
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.