didn t accomplish much. on the other hand, the progressive whipping of the party as you have just mentioned is putting a lot of pressure on these democrats to fight republicans on daca. and to tie it to the spending debate because that might increase their chances of getting a clean daca fix and not having to make concessions on these other immigration issues like border security and visa lottery program that republicans in the white house want to have changes on. that s where you will have democrats in tough spots while constituents might be flooding their phone lines with calls about not shutting the government down, there is no real path forward. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell was smart in that his promise to bring a daca bill to the floor was contingent on the government staying open. only concession democrats won last time would be thrown away if they brought us to the a shut down again. harris: begs the question where i stuarted this hour a few minutes ago, why did sena
what democrats did? i don t see it that way at all. the reality is that what this showed the american public and it s the reason the democrats backed down, was that democrats are more interested in illegal immigrants than they were about working men and women and the people in our military and keeping the government funded and taking an issue that had nothing to do with continuing funding and tried to inject that into a spending debate. the republicans have done this in the past and republicans got their head handed to them. every time, ted cruz did a couple years ago. before that, we had other things, where we tried to put extraneous things in these spending bills and the public said no, don t do that. if you got a problem with immigration or with obamacare, deal with it, but don t mess up, don t shut down the government, don t get to this brinksmanship. be adults. i think the democrats did not learn that lesson. they thought the media was going to be on their side, the folks
thanks for having me. so, the president s immigration action, we re seeing now the tangible effects of this starting to take hold. thousands of new jobs, millions of dollars spent, and now republicans also are going to have these affects to point to as the spending debate continues in congress. these numbers will be up for debate in february. funding for the department of homeland security. and republicans are hoping at that time to undercut the president s executive action by rolling back some of that funding. well, $50 million, just the start. where is it expected that money is going to come from? from the department of homeland security in. uh-huh. it is under the department of homeland security umbrella. but because of the president s executive action, congress doesn t need to actually approve any new funding, but come february when this is up for debate again they ll have to go back and decide whether or not
subject to something else. will people be prosecuted? i don t want them to be prosecuted but i do think it s important that we acknowledge what we did, we don t play semantic games. this was torture. and that we say we re not going to do it again and that there s a bright line there. very quickly, david. i think one reason they want this to go away, we have a war against isis and they need to keep the coalition together. when they have these international controversies breaking out, it may make it tougher to go against isis. david gergen and david rothkopf, thank you so much. a very important book and highly recommend it. thank you to you both for coming in. michele bachmann, we re going to talk about unlikely bedfellows and a spending debate going on in washington. she s getting ready to leave the united states congress. our exit interview with representative bachmann, that s coming up. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 [ male announcer ] your love for trading never stops,
write something like this and think this way. what this pope is talking about what s happening in this world and trying to is reality. yeah. reality. okay. so there s it no argument here. willie, you re all for bloomb g bloomberg s piece, right? no, i m not. good. let s move on. steve ratner, you ve got charts on the spending debate which seems to be a debate in washington. yeah. i ve got one chart as you know, the house last week passed the budget agreement. it s still in front of the senate where althere s a lot of pushback from conservative republican senators who thinks it does too much on the spending side. let s look at this package which i view anyway as being somewhat minim minimalist. show you projected spending going back to 2008 in some of the key categories. the red line is the what we call discretionary spending, domestic programs like infrastructure, transportation, education. includes defense. the red line went up a bit in