ms. ten nee: she spent the -- spent her: the -- spe life walking through the village. the village of pulaski embraced and cared for her for nine years. she was often seen wearing a bright orange dog collar so hunters would know who she was. she had her own facebook page with over 4,000 likes. sadly, bella hasn't been seen for several months and the consensus is that bella has passed on. bella brought joy to this beautiful community in the foothills of the adirondack mountains and the tughill plateau region. she was the village mascot and symbol of reciprocity of kindness. one compassionate resident reached out to an orphan bella when she needed help the most and she spent her life yielding back the warm spirit that marks the pulaski community. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman seek recognition? without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: i rise today to congratulate instructor at central pennsylvania institute of science and technology for being named national technical education teacher of the year. t.p.i.'s horticulture and landscaping instruct jor, joe luther, will be given the carl j. schafer memorial award, presented annually to recognize clear technical education teachers for their outstanding service. mr. luther will accept the award this thursday in a ceremony in nashville, tennessee. the award is presented by the largest provider of industry-based credentials and partner industry certifications for career and technical education programs across the nation. it was named for dr. carl j. schafer, a longtime champion of c.t.e. who gained recognition as a c.t.e. educator and author. this is the second time an instructor at c.p.i. has received the award. in 2015, dental assistant instructor mindy to bias was selected as the top c.t.e. teacher in the nation. as co-chair of the house career and technical education caucus i'm most proud of c.p.i. and mr. luther for this outstanding recognition. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? without objection the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. we hear a lot of negative about the tax reform bill moving through. mr. lamalfa: gladly, tonight, we have moved to conference committee to continue the process, continue the conversation. we can now take more and more opinions that people have on how to make the bill better, and it's been getting better as we go. in my own district, the first district of california, when all is said and done, this will simplify the tax code for more and more tax filers. already 70% of taxpayers do not use the method of trying to itemize every single item. instead they use a standard deduction. that will double, saving time, saving tax preparation, saving summon -- money, netting them a more better tax situation for their families. so i see a direct guaranteed tax cut for most people in rural california, rural rural america and those that are $100,000 income or less, that's the middle income we're targeting, that's the middle income folks we need to help and that's what this bill will do as well as create more jobs by the job creators in this country. s that good step and a good direction for america's taxpayers. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: are there any further one-minute requests? under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2017, the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert is recognized as the designee until 10:00 p.m. from the majority leader. appreciate my colleague pointing out, we have done something good here and when people talk about the tax bill that was passed, it's not what -- it's not everything everybody wanted, that's for sure. it's not everything republicans each wanted. but it is going to do good for most every american. it does -- i would love to have seen just across the board tax cut, i would like to have seen a tax cut that brought everybody to paying the same exact percentage, you make more you pay more, you make less you pay less. you know if those who believe in a tithe that kind of always worked well for the lord. everybody pays the same percentage. whether it's the widow's mite or hundreds of millions of dollars or the billions that warren buffett still refuses to have his company pay even though he says he would love to pay more taxes he ought to tell his so ers that in any event, there are people that were pay 10g% that are not going to pay any taxes. i don't see how anybody across the aisle could keep saying it's going to be worse for the poor. because those that were paying 10% tax, they're not going to pay any tax. it's good for them. it's great for them. i would love to see everybody have something that they pay in. something. so that they have some investment in the income tax system. seems to help focus people's attention on government when they see how much they're paying into the federal government and when it's a real percentage. but the bill cuts completely any income tax for those that were paying 10%. , those who were paying 25% they're being cut to 12%. that's a tremendous tax advantage for them. and in fact, you see that all the way through the tax bill that was led, creation of which was led by kevin brady, change of ways and means -- chairman of ways and means, he did a great job bringing the different interests together to get a great bill. tax,t the upper end, 39.6% that was not changed. and i get the reason the committee decided they wanted to leave the 39.6% for the wealthiest americans, leave that in place, because that way, the democrats could not come in, i know this was the thinking, if the -- if the only tax rate we don't lower is for the wealthiest americans, we leave that where it is, then they can't come in and say, we're cutting taxes for the wealthiest americans and putting it on the back of the poorest americans. well, they've come in and said it anyway. might as well have given everybody a fair tax break instead of leaving the wealthiest taxes right where they were, 39.6%, because they still came in here and said it. schumer still is saying it in the senate. but the truth is, when you look at the tax rates that people will pay and the exemptions being doubled, it's going to be much better for most people. there were some things in the senate bill i liked. and i didn't realize but i heard from people back home that we do have some seniors who do pay so much in medical expense, take such a tremendous amount of the small income they have, that they do have enough to take deductions for their medical expenses and if they're not allowed to take those medical xpenses as deductions, accountants tell me many of their clients will end up being bankrupt. so the senate left that provision in and i'm hopeful that will be in the final bill. we don't need to be hurting our seniors that are paying so much in medical expenses, even though they were assured obamacare would cure all ills when it came to health care. you like your insurance, you can keep it. well, that turned out to be a lie. if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. turned out to be a lie. you like your medicine you were taking, you could keep taking that medicine. turned out to be a lie. and in fact, there's actually incentives in obamacare for the insurance companies not to bring in the best cancer treaters, the best heart facilities, because gee that means people with cancer, with heart problems, would sign up for those policies and they might have to pay too much. deviously really inventive by the architect of obamacare to create a system that is going to be so bad it's going to fail at some point and the hope was that when that day came, people would throw up their hands and say, this is awful. i never thought i'd say this but maybe we better off just letting the government take over every bit of health care. well, government is already close to taking over all health care under obamacare. peoplesenator obama told on video, i'd like to have -- it's basically government running all phases of health care they give it a deceptive name, single payer. but we can't get there in one step. it'll take a couple of steps. obamacare was step one and complete government takeover of people's health care is step two and fortunately if we can add to the house bill what was added into the senate bill, a complete repeal of the individual mandate, then we will be on our way to bringing down premiums, to having people choose the health care policy they want, the health insurance policies they want. ultimately we have got to encourage people to put their own money, not in the pocket of the government, not in the pocket of the insurance company but into their own health savings accounts and build that up. that is he the hope for the future for young people to have enough money in their account down the road that not only for the time they become senior citizens, not only will they not want government intrusion, they won't need it. . d those that are chronically poor and ill, we have to return the requirements that were put in place that caused single moms to start making much more than they had when their income had been flat for 30 years when adjusted for inflation. i was surprised to see that on a graph up at harvard at a seminar up there, but sure enough, the facts spoke for themselves. so there are things we can do to help people return to work, to take care of themselves, make their own decisions and i think this tax bill will help do that especially if we put in the repeal of the individual mandate. i'm surprised to hear that this tax bill will hurt the poor in america when the people paying 10% will not pay any tax. the people paying 25% will pay 12% tax, it's hard to accept that they are going to be paying more tax to help the rich when the rich did not get a tax eduction from the 39.6%. i do want to take up a critically important decision by the supreme court of the united states. there is' an article from ian mason, president trump's travel ban is once again to largely go back into effect after the supreme court of the united courts' ayed two lower injunctions monday. the orders come in response by filings by the department of justice on friday asking the supreme court to stay the preliminary injunctions in the two main travel ban cases, hawaii versus trump in the ninth circuit and international refugee assistance project versus trump in the fourth circuit. these proceedings have been proceeding up and down the court system for months. and i do think in the judiciary committee it is time that we start bringing some of these renegade judges who were not content to wear black robes and be judges, but took on the role being legislators and elected skiffs. they took all three branches into themselves. basically what power the president didn't have to fully invoke the travel ban, congress had given him any extra that he needed. he had full authority to do what he did. and anybody that could not see that people coming in from countries where are radical islam was destroying the countries and there were messages from the leaders of those radical islamic groups that we are getting our soldiers into these groups of refugees that are going in the western civilization so we can destroy them, i mean they weren't even hiding what they were doing, although they didn't tell us what individuals were their soldiers. and as we had heard previously , wet vetting of individuals heard testimony in our committee that at least people coming from to be n they apply efugees, they had some background we could compare and contrast what they were saying about the reasons to come in. e had even fingerprints on i.e.d.'s and criminal records from iraq. we had their government records from iraq. but as they came from syria, some other countries, when yemen was in chaos, we did not have the government records -- we didn't have fingerprints, we didn't have anything, so we were told with those charged with the obligation of vetting these individuals, we'll vet them, but we've got absolutely nothing to vet them with, so they'll end up coming in, because we've got nothing to say that what they're saying is not true even when the radical islamists that want to kill americans and destroy their way of life. what president trump did was exceedingly reasonable. deputy attorney general, sali yates, step forward and say, i'm going to take on the role of president and justice and legislator and tell you i'm not going to defend this law because i have judged it it not to be up to my standards. well, she was wrong. she was wrong then and she's wrong today as she talks about issues even after her judgment is shown to be so flawed as the supreme court has. and i know the travel ban was changed somewhat, but, still, from what the supreme court has indicated, the president had the power to do what he did to protect americans despite what justice sali yates said, without her black robe on, when she defied orders and defied the constitution and refused to carry out her duties. . that's a bit of good news but sarah carter has another great story today that she got hannity.com.und on .b.i. supervisor booted from mueller probe, fluid mike flynn. the special agent under scrutiny after being removed from mueller's special counsel's bureau'sso oversaw the terviews of the agency's interviews. lynn pled guilty to one count. f.b.i. agent was one of two f.b.i. agents who interviewed flynn, which took place on january 24 at the white house, said several sources. the other f.b.i. special agent who interviewed flynn is described by sources as a field supervisor in the russian squad at the f.b.i.'s washington field office according to an official with knowledge of the interview. the agent was removed from his role in the special counsel's office after it was discovered he had made disparaging comments about president trump in text messages between him and his alleged lover f.b.i. attorney lisa paige according to the "new york times" and "washington post," which first reported the stories. the agent is also under investigation by the department of justice inspector general for his role in hillary clinton's email server and ongoing investigation into russia's election meddling. on saturday, devin nunes, chided the justice department and f.b.i. for not disclosing why the agent had not been removed from the special counsel a few months ago. the former u.s. intelligence official told this reporter quote, with the recent revelation that the agent was removed from the special counsel investigation, it seems likely that the accuracy and veer asity the 302 flynn's interview should be reviewed and called into question. w the 302 is section 302 report summary by the f.b.i. agent of what was said by the witness. so we have a biased witness at the f.b.i. that's not recording what mike flynn said word-for-word. he is writing down in his notes is biased, skewed opinion of what mike flynn said. we know it's biased, it's skewed . and since mike flynn worked faithfully for so many years and survived the purges over and over of commander in chief obama and very, very briefly worked would ld trump, it should hat mike flynn have had more credibility than that hated character donald trump so much. i have heard talk that mike flynn could have fought this, but he basically had been bankrupted by the department of justice and could not afford attorneys' fees anymore, and as sometimes happens, they threatened to go after his son, on this one to plea count. since apparently the biased, ejudiced partisan f.b.i. agent, strosk, had something different in his note, his summary of what mike flynn said than what mike flynn said he said. so he pled. out from under the terrible egal fees that this task force seems to have unlimited authority. bysn't seem to be reigned in rod rosenstein appointed by mueller, of course not. because rosenstein and mueller were involved in getting files aled, the facts of which should have prevented, what we understand should have prevented the sale of american uranium from ever going forward. so it only makes sense, gee, convince jeff sessions to recuse himself. he said he talked to the career guys, like rosenstein. rosenstein could be considered a career guy, and then he appoints his buddy that helped him in the russia investigation over years which established that russia was trying to cornering the market, they were committing crimes to get american uranium and if that came out, then hillary clinton wouldn't be able to get her buddies to approve that sale so russia could end up with our uranium and if russia didn't end up with so much of our uranium, do you really think that $145 million from the stock holders that ended up with the money or the uranium and all the money that flowed with it, you really think they would have given that to the clinton foundation. they haven't given a dime since. if they were all that charged up with all the good the clinton foundation was doing, doesn't it make sense they would have kept giving after hillary clinton was no longer the secretary of state and when there was still hope of her being president even though that's gone? gee, wouldn't they still have contributed if it was all about the good the clinton foundation was doing instead of a quid pro quo, you give us this uranium, we'll make you rich and you'll hit the russian lottery, the mega millions for the clintons and hit the russian lottery, they did. . a former f.b.i. agent sid the investigation into strohs and the emails shows, quote a bias that can't be ignored, particularly if he had any -- anything to do with flynn's interview and his role in it. the former intelligence official questioned, quote, how logical is it that flynn is being charged for lying to an agent whose character and neutrality was called into question by the special counsel? according to an anonymous source in "the washington post," strohs and pates exchanged a number of texts that, quote, expressed anti-trump sentiments that appeared to favor clinton. that was apparently between him and his lover. man s not because he's a full of hate. apparently, a man full of love. mccabe told flynn, quote, some agents were heading over to the white house but flynn thought it was part of the routine work the f.b.i. had been doing and said they'd be cleared at the gate, the source said. it wasn't until after they were already in flynn's office that he realized he was being formally interviewed he didn't have an attorney with him, they added. according to another source with direct knowledge of the interview, mccabe contacted flynn directly by phone at the white house. white house officials spent the earlier part of the week with the f.b.i. overseeing training, security measures associated with their roles, so it was no surprise to flynn that mccabe had called. snuck up on him. apparently that's supposed to be a lesson, the f.b.i. calls, never know if it's something that hates you, hates the people ou work for. article by daniel flynn, breitbart, the former assistant director of the f.b.i. wonders who investigates the investigators in the wake of the former trump administration national security advisor michael flynn pleading guilty to lying to the f.b.i. and agreeing to cooperate with special counsel robert mueller's problem. quote, bob mueller should have never been offered nor accepted the job as special counsel as he has a huge conflict of interest, unquote. im calston tells breitbart news. he should have recused 4i78s. sounds like what i've been saying for many months now. not only do observers describe mueller as the man he recommended to replace him as f.b.i. director james comey as close or even best friends but the special counsel pursues an investigation heavily involving the bureau he once led. how one maintains detachment in leading a team that includes numerous anti-trump partisans in a probe involving one's close friend and the former bureau for which mueller served as director goes unexplained. other problems he sees include the means by which investigators obtained information and what instituted probable cause to obtain it. quote, the obama administration apparently had the advantage of using electronic surveillance, collecting information on the trump campaign that collection in my view may be found to be unlawful, he ex-ploins. -- explains. at the very least, one administration conducting surveillance on the opposition party looking to replace it strikes as unusual if not unprecedented. in 1972, for instance, president richard nixon's political team relies on former agents of the f.b.i. and c.i.a. to gather intelligence on the democratic party. if the surveillance and investigatory methods prove unlawful this puts mueller in an awkward position of looking into his close friend and perhaps the bureau both men once led. quote if they use the phony dossier as the predicate for the fisa order they obtained, that could be a huge problem. if they knew the information but phony, that is a felony. if they did not know it was phony, they were incompetent, he tells breitbart news. the dossier, which americans belatedly discovered was an opposition research investigation funded by hillary clinton's campaign and other partisan sources served as a justification in the foreign intelligence surveillance act court to obtain a wiretap on trump campaign advisor carter page. christopher steele, former british intelligence officer who compiled the opposition research dubbed an intelligence dossier in the media, admits that neither he -- he neither traveled to russia nor spoke to many of the sources for the anti-trump document that the clinton campaign funded and the f.b.i. used in its investigation. quote, this whole mat we are the dossier, the navings ensued, includes fisa surveillance and the unmasking of hundreds of names in my view will prove to be violations of the rules set down by the congress for the unmasking or worse will be found to be violations of federal law, unquote, he concludes. both the justice department -- -- the justice department should find out if the f.b.i. paid for this phony dossier and inspect the affidavit given to the fisa court to determine the accuracy of their probable cause and hopefully that's what is being done at this time but as i derstand it, the pro-hillary clinton people still at the justice department have not been forthcoming with the information remains to be seen. other articles talking about the anti-trump text messages showing a pattern of bias on mueller's team by chuck ross today in "the daily caller." jonathan hill, jonathan easley with "the hill," freedom watch sues to remove mueller. thank goodness for freedom watch doing so. the article says conservative group filed suit on monday seeking to remove special counsel robert mueller from the justice department's investigation into russian meddling. lawyer larry clayman, founder of the watchdog group freedom watch filed a complaint in u.s. district court that seeks to force the justice department to investigate leaks from the special counsel as well as, quote, the obviously conflicts of interest among staff, unquote. complaint against attorney general jeff sessions states that, quote, it is a criminal tovens leak grand jury information, unquote. and seeks mueller's removal. quote, robert muler is not a man washington, as a d.c. democrat and republican lil establishment like to spin. he's just another representing his establishment benefactors in both political parties who want to see the presidency of donald trump destroyed. there's deep anger at mule own the right and growing calls for him to recuse himself from the special investigation into whether trump had improper contacts with moscow in the 2016 election. clayman's hanging his effort on the notion that mueller is too close to former f.b.i. director comey and his team has leaked damaging stories about those he's investigating to the press the complaint also argues mueller has politicized the probe by hiring democrats for his investigative team. conservatives have also argued that mueller's probe has extended beyond his mandate of investigating russian meddling. more recently, conservative media and others on the right have drawn attention to mueller's time as director questioning why didn't regulators that a subsidiary of a foreign uranium mining company was under investigation before controversial deal for the sale of the company to russian-owned firm was approved? quote, he must be held accountable to the law and should not be able to do as he pleases to further his and his friends' like former f.b.i. director james comey's, political agenda. we're hopeful that the court will order justice to do its job, conduct an expeditious and impartial investigation and then order muler to step down as special counsel. there are others perhaps who practice outside the washington, d.c. swamp who could step in and to an honest, conflict-free investigation of so-called ussian collusion, unquote. quite interesting. but this article today from samantha schmitt, "washington post," quite iron ibbling, james comey, sally yates, eric holder defend f.b.i. after trump's twitter attack. this is the same eric holder that lied to us repeatedly in our judicial committee hearings, he obfuscated, concealed evidence, refused to disclose ,vidence, was found in contempt but he's he still has the unmitigated gall to step forward if he's a paragon of virtue and can stand up for mueller's character, i guess. comey also has taken to tweeting out bible verses,ic that's wonderful, applaud him reading the bible. wish he'd been relying on the bible a little more when he was f.b.i. director. the e he started preparing statement that would indicate there was nothing to prosecute hillary clinton over before she was actually investigated, before he gave immunity to people, before he let her lawyer who was a witness sit in on he was parts before exonerating her even though the evidence that he recited made clear an offense had been committed. and there were stories that the only reason he came out before the election and said he was reopening the investigation was so that he could keep f.b.i. agents who had found all these tens of thousands of emails on , they wiener's computer said this surely justifies because here's email she is said didn't exist, so he goes public, says they reopen, and that's true. they'd kept those f.b.i. agents from coming forward, resigning or saying that he was doing what it appears now, more evidence, that he was apparently doing, exonerating hillary clinton, hough evidence was there to go further. i remember telling some media back then, well, we'll know whether this is a serious reopening of the investigation, words like that, if he comes back, you know , in a week and says, oh, no, before the election, nothing here. clearly you would not have had enough time to go through all the emails, and they hadn't, but he came forward and exonerated her anyway. but new york post has an article yesterday, editorial board, another anti-trump smoking gun turns out to be nothing. once again, a spezzed big break in the drive to destroy president trump over collusion with russians during the 2016 campaign stands exposed as nothing more than bad reporting, plus the professionalism of the f.b.i. looked compromised by its anti-trump bias. as it does by the commevents by people like yates, holder, comey , says the media went berserk friday on news that former confidant mike flynn copped a plea deal with special counsel bob mueller. hey launched an orgy of what flynn must have spilled. ryan ross said flynn had been instructed to reach out to moscow during the campaign. this seemed to be the long-awaited proof of collusion against hillary clinton, except ross retracted the claim hours later thfrpbl the reach out was only after election day when any president-elect is expected to start connecting with other world leaders, u.s.-friendly or not. and that's the whole thing. ad thing about mike flynn. it was not a crime for him to reach out to russians after the election. there was a claim that there was big col like to bring down -- collusion to bring down hillary clinton when we don't know who hacked into the d.n.c. server and could have easily been an nside job. pretty sad days. "the hill" reports that he hanged language. it was reported today, former f.b.i. official who was recently fired from special counsel's robert mueller's russian team reportedly edited a key phrase that removed possible legal implications and former f.b.i.'s director's statement on his decision on the hillary clinton investigation. st rmpomp sk changed the description cnn reported monday. one source told the news outlet that records revealed that he changed the words from grossly negligent to extremely careless scrubbing a keyword that have ve -- could have had implications and could have been prosecuted. pretty tragic. article goes on to say, the agent who served as number two has been thrust in the center of controversy after news of his dismissal from comby's team. people who were part of the drafting process using a red pen on comey's statement before he came forward. senate judiciary chairman chuck grassley questioned the revised language change after receiving records last month before c nmp n reported. mueller and his team are broadly investigating russian interference in the 2016 election and more broadly investigating is an understatement. comey said the clinton's use of a private email server was extremely careless, but he added there was no reasonable prosecutor would charge her. -- i want to finish on this, mr. speaker. fox news reporting, mexican man who was deported from the united states more than a dozen times was sentenced friday in oregon, 35 years in prison after pleading guilty to kidnapping, sex abuse and other charges on separate attacks on two women. sergio jose martinez said he would see them in hell after the sentence was pronounced on friday in a portland courtroom. there is a decent chance they may not be at the same place he is in the next life. just today, another young man , jose been deported garcia was found not guilty in the shooting death of a woman, that case that touched off a national immigration debate. i just want to finish by saying there is a lot of talk about amnesty, daca, all these different things, but, mr. speaker, the truth is, until the border is secured, we should not en be talking about amnesty, about any kind of legality for people that are here illegally, because it creates another swarm across our border and if we are going to do this, we are going to have to keep doing it every few years because the people are going to keep coming. we must build a wall where it's needed and secure the border and when it's done, we work these other things out. until the border is secured, we should not even be talking about it. people like these criminals, these rapists, shouldn't have een in this country. people that are dead that should be alive, people that have their lives murderously tortured through horrendous sexual assault, so many lives have been harmed are ended. let's secure the border and let's do what it takes and we can work the other things out. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. does the gentleman from have a motion. mr. gohmert: i move we adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted and accordingly the house is adjourned until 10:00 a.m. tomorrow for morning hour debate. arms and federal funding for two weeks. as always, the house is live here on c-span. announcer: cia director mike pompeo and former cia director leon panetta talk about the president's use of twitter and national security. spencerretary richard outlines the need for consistent funding from congress for the military. look at the upcoming negotiations between the house and senate on the republican house reform bill. >> the house and senate voting this week on going to conference on the republican tax reform bill. joining us as an adjutant with bloomberg news. the house and senate this week going to conference, what are some of the key differences they have to work out between the two different versions of tax reform? there are two different versions. among them are the number of brackets for individual rates. the senate version has seven brackets whereas the house version had for brackets. the individual rates and senate version are also set to expire. that rate cut will go away after 20 -- 20 25 to comply with senate rules. there are other differences such as the treatment of pass-throughs. in the house version, it is a lower rate. in the senate version, it is a deduction. there are a few other things like the senate bill ended up not repealing the minimum tax for some situations. it did not fully repeal the estate tax as the house bill does eventually. bill,cer: the senate adding the opening of an noir, the alaska national wildlife energyfor oil and exploration also ending the individual mandate. is that likely to survive a conference committee? >> the conference version will probably have two and a preserving a lot of the provisions that were in the senate bill. simply because they have a more narrow margin in the senate. and also because they have to follow senate budget rules. the repeal of the individual mandate gives them $300 billion in extra revenue space in order provisionst other they need, and also the mr provision was important to listen markowski, the senator from alaska whose vote is very important. >> who are some of the key republican players we will see in the upcoming conference committee? >> obviously, the chairman of the two committees. the house side, the ways and means committee, and on the senate side, senator orrin hatch. they will be important people in this committee process as the conference comes. they will be representing the version that they pass through their respective chambers along with a different members from each of the committees. side, anddemocratic your peace, here is where the gop tax plan stands right now. saying "myenator sense is that they have a conference in name only will have to see." what do you expect the democrats role will be? >> democrats don't expect a robust conference. they -- there is a lot that has to be reconciled. there is also a lot that has to be fixed. the senate bill passed late at night, a was about 2:00 in the morning on saturday. there are a few provisions that will have to be looked at and finalize before it is something that is ready to be signed into law. there are some changes that will have to be made in the conference committee. it is not going to be just the house passing the senate version , although, like i said, a lot of the provisions will more closely resemble the senate version. democrats are likely to have a small role in this process. probably more of a symbolic role than anything else. there will be democrats on the conference committee. but they will not have any power to change the outcome. >> we know about president trump's meeting in the white house with congressional leadership. democratic and republican at the white house. how else would the white house will be president be involved in the final text negotiations? >> probably by twitter. we were seeing over the weekend that he would be open to a corporate rate of 22%. as opposed to 20% in the two versions of the bill. that is showing he is open to that kind of change. i was told by leadership sources that it does not mean he wants the rates to be 20%, but that he is open to it. it shows he would have more flexibility. they will be consulting the white house on this, making sure there is nothing in there they would for any reason cause he not to sign this legislation. >> first off this week, the houseboats i'm going to conference for this tax reform measure. tell us the timetable for getting it done? this donel is to get before christmas. that would give you the conference committee and tell december 22, which is the friday before christmas. they would have that time to work out their differences. they really want to finish this by next week if possible so that -- h timber pass the final version. and send it to the president >>'s desk before christmas. >>anna is congressional reporter for bloomberg reader at bluebird.com. she is on twitter at an edge for. thanks so much. c-span's washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact. coming up tuesday morning, a discussion of the supreme court case on gay marriage and religious freedom with elizabeth weinberg no of the constitutional accountability center and carry sabrina of the judicial crisis network. and even e-news natural resources editor noel strong talks about president trump's position to strengthen the size of two national monuments. be sure to watch and c-span's washington journal, live at 7:00 a.m. eastern tuesday morning. join the discussion. now we take you to salt lake city were president trump announced large parts of two national monuments in the state totaling over 3 million acres would no longer receive protection under the antiquities act. he made the announcement in a speech at the utah state capital . more than to enter 50 miles away from the sites. please welcome united states senator orrin hatch. [applause] >> thank you. thank you so much. it is a real privilege for me to be here and an honor to introduce the president of the united states of america. i have been given the redundant to introducing most famous man in the world. it is a bit

Related Keywords

New York , United States , Moscow , Moskva , Russia , Portland , Oregon , Texas , Alaska , Washington , Whitehouse , District Of Columbia , California , Syria , Mexico , Iraq , Tennessee , Saudi Arabia , Pennsylvania , Utah , Hawaii , Americans , America , Mexican , Russian , Russians , American , Mike Flynn , James Comey , Robert Mueller , Christmas Anna , Christopher Steele , Sali Yates , Kevin Brady , Sergio Jose Martinez , Sarah Carter , Bob Mueller , Sally Yates , Statessenator Orrin , Jonathan Hill , Devin Nunes , Rosenstein , Ryan Ross , Hillary Clinton , Daniel Flynn , Chuck Ross ,