Transcripts For CSPAN3 Senator Chris Murphy Holds Town Hall Meeting 20170515

All right, all right, sit down. Thank you, everybody, thats very, very nice. I have a massive cold and that makes me feel better today. I feel more well given that nice introduction. Thank you there martin, what should i say, whatever you say make it short, we got a lot to cover here. I think he referenced who we have with us but i want to thank all the folks here at uconn university. They do a fantastic job every single day here. Thank you for opening this up to representatives Caroline Simmons and tom and dan fox, thank you for being here. I want to get right to this. I am sure you have loads of questions about what is happening and what has happened and i want to answer them. We are going to talk today about a lot of things. The foundation of it, well talk about the rule of law. We are going to talk about the simple idea of the root of this country since our founding that no individuals, no matter how powerful or what title stands before their names supposed to be above the set of rules that we all play by. And, thats certainly been the topic of discussions of this country for the last week but frankly we have been talking about in some way shape or form lasting of 110 days. I want to talk a little bit about that today. First, let me say thank you forgiving me the opportunity to do this job. I dont come from a family that has any background in politics. My mom grew up in the Housing Project of new britain and connecticut or one generation moved from poverty. I get to be a United States senator and whether you voted for me or did not in this room, the idea that the people and state placed their faith in me to b oe one of your two voices the senate is an honor and to be honest, it is a thrill. So i am so thankful to you forgiving me this chance. It Getting Better at it everyday because i am learning from you. I am learning from you of the priorities and what you care about and how i should prioritize of places that are before us and this is an exercise for me in trying to learn and lesson. I do a lot of these town halls. I try to engage proactively and innovative ways as well. I am one of the few members of the senate that does my own feeds on facebook and snap chats that i learned how do do all that stuff. I walked across the state of connecticut this last summer going 130 miles. [ applause ] going from one side or another talking to a lot of people where people who would never taken on themselves to show to a town hall or write emails. I try to engage and learn in creative ways as well as traditional ways like this. First, thank you forgiving me the chance to do this job. We are talking about the rule of laws and checks and balances. First, i want to say why we are here. Donald trump is fairly transparent advertise to people that hes going to blow up the way things are done in washington. He advertised and he said famously in his speech that i alone can fix this. People were drawn to that whether we like it or not. He won a lot of votes. There is this tiring of democracy thats happening out there in this country. That sounds like a hard phrase to handle. For a long time, people understood the trades you got in democracy and the idea is you got all this efficiency and took a long time for something to become a law from an idea. But, the trade was in exchange for that in efficiency, you got the outcome that benefited the whole rather than elites. You got policies thats made faster but you tend to give results for the ruling rather than everybody else and protects the able for masses and general population to get results. It is good for them. Wait a second, i am gnot gettin that trade any longer. It is more efficient ever been. Yet, the results that are coming out of washington still seems to be accruing the top 1 or 2 . Not to me. People started asking themselves, whether we still should be invested in this big great experiment and trump with his advertisement with i alone can fix this started to look for attractive. We need to recognize that this is a moment not just to take on this enormous challenges but reminding people why we engage. We are going to talk a lot about immigration and healthcare and healthcare and fbi. I also want us to be reminded that you should not take for granted that this democracy is inevitable that this is something that you are going to live under for the rest of your lifetime. We got to breathe new health into it and reminding people why we are invested in it. Now, i will say that there are parts of this experience that have been whole. There are checks and balances inside this big endeavor that have worked, the president right out of the gate tries the pass an immigration order that was plainly unconstitutional and the idea that you are going to stop people coming into based on your religion and violates the pr premise and the amendment that you are attached to i. The president is in amidst right now trying to push through a healthcare bill thats absolutely humanitarian catastrophe waiting to happen. They thought theyre going to get it done in february. They thought theyre going to be able to pass this thing, they have not been able to do and stopped over and over again because the legislature. Interesting ways is responding because people are rising up and say, listen, if you vote for this, well vote you out. It is taking a lot longer to get the bill through on a threevote majority through the house of representatives. It is stuck in the senate right now because republican senators know there is consequences voting for something this inhumane and this cruel. The checks and balances are built in the legislature and responsible for the people and you know is holding for the time being. But, there are other places where checks and balances are not. I know thats where well spend a lot of time talking about today or clearly spending time of what happened last week. You cannot have a functioning democracy when the president of the United States can dismiss Law Enforcement individuals or leaders that have carrying out investigation against the chief initiatives. I am sorry, the explanation that donald trump carries does n not he got fired because he was on something. He got fired because he was getting closer and closer to a damaging story about the trump campaigns. Interaction with the russian government. We dont know what the end of that story is. We do know that director comey was going to the highest level of the Justice Department asking for more resources pursuing that investigation until the end. It is whathard for me to think it is a coincidence that a week later he was fired. Well have closed door hearings to ask questions and closer to the truth during that, i hope. This is the direct threat to the rule of law. I hope that as my republican friends go home this weekend and talk to their constituents. Theyll choose to rise to the occasion. As i said social media this week and they are rare normals where you have to choose between your party or republicans. My advice to my republican friends is that you will never regret choosing the republicans. So this you know what i think here. I ultimately believe the investigation of justice of the time being and we need an independent prosecutor thats going to follow. And so lets give the weekend for republicans to think through this and make a decision and joining us. If they choose not to then democrats and likeminded republicans in the house and senate will have to consider all the tools of disposal and try and pushing this country forward and recognizing the gravity of this moment. Let me talk about the other threat of rules of law and one thats not in the news as much as it should be then i want to move straight onto your question. Thats where it comes to the conduct of foreign affairs. We spend a lot of time thinking about americas role in the world. Congress over the course of the last 10 or 15 years, i was often in the i simply did not believe that there was authorization, legal authorization for this administration to take military action against isis. I did not think it was wrong for the administration to take military action. I thought they needed authorization to do that. Today it is much harder to declare war against enemies than it was 30 or 40 or 50 years ago. It is not two army marching against each other over the peace treaties of the end of hostilities and something much harder to find with victory thats much harder to get your head wrapped around as principles. I worry that if congress does not authorize the war against isis. Well never ever authorize war ever again as a congress. You will lose your voice in making those decisions. What is happening today syria should be worried. A slow creep of u. S. Troops inside that country from a number that was close to zero, a year ago to a now looks like thousands, emissions thats very, very hard to define about helping local groups retake raqqa but increasingly looks like a mission that in capsule late raqqa and between all of faction that exist around town. If thats the case, syria is looking a lot more like iraq and no debate in congress whether it is a worthwhile endeavor for the country to participate in. I worry about checks and balances falling apart when it comes to foreign policy. This country is getting into another major intervention in the middle east without a full debate in congress and we can talk about this situation in north korea as well in which it represents real challenges for this question of rule of law, too. It is creating this molasses around the trump agenda. I am trying to raise my voice, i will be happy to talk to you about some important wins that we got for connecticut and south western connecticut . The last bill in the format that i was the author of last year. I am also trying to raise my voice on a National Level and trying to be apart of what i think is a defining moment for this country and i will end on this. I am perpetually a Glass Half Full guy. You cannot be in this job and see the light down the tunnel. Here is how i do this. I am stealing a little bit of this from a colleague of mine who talks about these words of declaration of independence which are in a way, north star of the country, all men are created equal, totally flawed from the beginning because of the time, all men were not equal and the phrase just said men. It was a radical idea and this idea of a colony. You know you can kind of read our entire countrys history as trying to get a little bit closer to that reality. That reality of fuel equality of existence and equality of experience and yet, you can also read this nations history as one of two steps forward and then one step back that when you make enormous amount of progress in a short period of time, there is this natural tendency for americans to dig a temporary trend. We should not forget how much process we made over the last ten years. The ability to think about healthcare as a human right rather than a privilege, 100 years to talk about universal healthcare and of the enactment of the law and our ability to bring in waves of immigrants and the traditions of those that we brought from europe and asia. There has been this decision among big parts of the American Public that just put a pause onto dig a trench for the time being. I would argue that the definition of this country frankly in the end is not about the two steps forward or steps back. After that pause, we decide to get moving once again on the road to that north star. Thats one of these moments. Thats what it is. It is a moment in which we decide whether we are still on that journey or not. I just fundamentally believe that well make a decision that we are in this Resistance Movement of whatever you want to call it thats built across the country is a collective effort thats built on the ladder and get back on the journey. Count me as part of that Resistance Movement. Thank you very much. [ applause ] lets ask some questions. So we have two microphones so folks can line up at the microphones and well take as many as we can. Sorry for the sp the roads ar just awfully jammed today so i am going to take as many as i can in the next hour. Lets get through it, lets rotate there to there and upstairs. There we go. Well sort of do that. Go ahead. And quick questions and i will give quick answers. A founding member, thank you for all that you do and so many areas, i am going to address the independent commission issue. In the face of the comey firing and Washington Post yesterday ran a piece entitled Senate Democrats can stop trump scandal from becoming the new normal, using tactics such as asking mcconnell during a time to yield questions. In light of the threat of this weeks events to the foundational pendings of our democracy, will you agree to use these measures until such time as your republican counter part agree to an independent commission and special prosecutor to investigate trump russia ties. Thank you. Thanks for the question. [ applause ] i have not read that article so i cannot apply on it. I think you heard me saying in my opening comments that i think we absolutely are going to have to use every tool in our disposal trying to translate our colleagues of the house if republicans choosing to join us. I dont think well under estimate of what this moment is for the Republican Party and thinking about what we are asking them to do. We are asking them to step outside of their party to directly challenge this president to call for the appointment of independent council. I understand theyll not be able to make that decision on a dime. It will take them a couple of days to figure out the gravity of this moment. We dont have the luxury. It is the trail thats grown cold and the message thats being sent to the fbi and chilling message of the truth. Well get solidified. I want to give my republican colleagues some time to understand what they need to do here. That time cannot be limit less and well have to use after power that we have. You tease some of the tools we have, you know they have limits of efficacy. Excuse me. You are asking about asking questions of majority leader and the problem is we dont control the house of the senate so we have procedure tools that are our disposal that ultimately are not just deposited in the end but we should take a look at using anything that we have. Hi senator, good afternoon, diane here from stanford, the conservatives have done a phenomenal job of the last few decades. Now theyre attacking the democrats of the party of no, no ideas and the party attached to obama and the clintons ma shch. Do they have a strategy or fresh messengers or some people in the pipeline thats going to be attractive to the general public instead of the whole party antimessaging thats going on. Thank you for all your fantastic work in stanford and around the area. I am not here to deliver a certain amount of the state of the democratic party. I will take your question and try to answer it. You know listen, i think we have to understand that your people have watched this economy technically recover and they dont believe it is recover for them. Ultimately, we have to be a party of Economic Growth but not just for the top 1 . We got to be a party of Economic Growth for everybody and not just for millionaires and billionaires. We got to be a party of inclusion and a party of the country that includes everybody. We have to be a party of Economic Growth for everybody. In fact, the matter is, you know Bernie Sanders got hillary during the campaign talking about free college because, you know, it is unrealistic. So what if it is unrealistic . It is a great idea that everyone should be able to eye foafford to college. [ applause ] as a party, i think we got to be consistent of our messaging and making sure that it is based in peoples economic fears and we cannot be afraid of putting big revolutionary ideas on the table that may not be a realist tomorrow but tell the country of the vision of where we wanted to go, deep into the future so you know i think right now, we are in a crisis moment which this Republican Congress is trying to jam down our throats of legislative measures that i is a lot of our efforts is around opposing that agenda. We have to be much better at stra translating who we are and not being afraid of big ideas and telling people of where we want to go. Hi, how are you . My name is jeffery all coaliti. And our main function, reason we created the group, is to attain the passage of a bill thats already in the house, in committee, which is hr676. Medicare for all. I just want to repeat that for everybody. Hr676. Its worth reading. This bill will provide health care, real Quality Health care to every child, woman, and man in the United States. And it will not only do that, but it will also provide a savings of over 600 billion per year. Not over ten years, 600 billion per year with a promise of increased savings in the future. It will also Save Companies thousands of dollars per employee per year. And make our companies more competitive overseas and help our balance of payments. So we have several requests for you. We would like to ask if you would commit to introducing this bill in the senate as an alternative to the horrendous bill that was passed in the house. If youll becommits champion in the senate. If youll meet with us and work with us so we can figure out y ways we can support you and you can support us and support a National March to pass medicare for all. Thank you. Let me yeah, i would be happy to talk with you more about the bill. Im not familiar with the house bill. Heres my approach to this issue about where we go once we hopefully defeat this just terrible draconian, cruel republican attempt to repeal the Affordable Care act. I am a believer in the public option. What is the public option . Its the ability for anybody in this country to choose whether they want to be on a private plan or on a medicare plan. And originally conceived, the public option was going to be sort of its own medicarelike plan, but you can short circuit that and give people direct access to medicare, right . And allow them to buy into medicare or allow them to get a discounted price if theyre on a lower income. Ultimately, i think thats probably the fastest way to the kind of system that you want, which is a system in which everyone in this country is on a medicare product. Give them the choice. Give individuals the choice as to whether they want to be on medicare or they want to stay on their private Sector Health care plan. Ill take a look at the house bill, but the reason that i have been very supportive of a public option is because i think from a policy and from a political standpoint, it probably makes more sense to give people the option to get into that system if they want. I do, though, think that the bulk of our attention right now has to be focused on defeating the proposal that is before the house and the senate. Thats where our energy has to be. And i will i will just tell you, republicans are trying to as diane mentioned, republicans are saying, well, democrats arent for anything. Why arent democrats telling us their 20step plan that is the alternative to our disastrous Health Care Bill . Thats because they want us to be spending all of our time talking about what we would do differently rather than stopping what they are on the precipice of passing. And they want to do it quickly, right . They want to jam this bill through the senate and house before the people can understand it. So im all for discussing ideas about what should come next. But im unapologetic about spending the vast bulk of my time right now trying to explain to the American Public what the American Health care act is, why it is so terrible for them, why it fixes not a single problem in the existing system and making sure it gets defeated. Once we do that, then we and sit down and talk about where we go next as a party and where we go next as a congress. Up here, senator. Then it will be kaylas turn in the overflow. Great. Good afternoon, senator. My name is robert from stamford. Is there preemptive action that you can take in the senate to prevent trump from withdrawing the United States from the Paris Climate Accord . [ applause ] yeah, theres theoretically, there is. Practically, there is not. There is not support in a Republicancontrolled Senate to pass legislation that would bind the United States to staying in the paris accord. As you know, the Paris Agreement was not conceived as a treaty, so it was not ratified by the United States senate because it was constructed as a voluntary executive agreement of nations. So yes, theoretically, the United States senate could pass that, but you have a United States senate that is right now by and large controlled by the oil and gas industry, and thus has no interest in supporting the United States staying in paris. You have a couple republican senators we could work on with that, but not enough ultimately to get you to 50 or 51. And i know well probably have more questions on clielt. We are putting as much pressure as we can in as many innovative ways as we can on this administration to stay in paris, so you know, i spend a little time every week thinking about how i can organize Public Sector and private sector pressure on the administration to stay in paris. I think its that important. But we do have to think about ways we can work around this administration. We do have to think about ways in which states and localities can continue to build green. We can buy green things. Ill give you one bit of good news before i move on to the next question to give you the sense hope is not all lost with respect to republicans. We have been going through a series of what are called Congressional Review Act votes. This is the ability of congress within 90 days of a regulation being passed to overturn the regulation with a 50vote majority. So all of the legislative successes that trump claims, they are all under this very narrow window that congress has, 90 days after regulation is passed, to overturn it. Thats what congress has been doing. Overturning the late era obama regulations. Well, republicans successfully overturned every single one of these that they brought before the senate for a vote except for this week. This week, they brought a cra overturning a regulation that obama had passed at the end of last year regulating methane emissions from oil and gas discovery and Distribution Systems. They brought it up for a vote, and it failed. [ applause ] three republicans joined 48 democrats and the regulation which restriblths the amount of methane that can escape from the oil and gas Distribution Systems stayed in place. You do have republicans that are occasionally willing to work with us. Probably not enough to work on a standalone bill on paris, but maybe on smaller efforts like we saw this week on methane. All right, were going to go to the overflow room. Hi, good morning. Good afternoon, actually. My name is joe williams. Im from stamford. Im here with my wife patricia. First, i want to say thank you for what youre doing for us. And your hard work is very evident, and we have seen it on your news shows and everything. We do appreciate that. But one thing about in regards to the health care, i do believe that the democrats should have been able to walk and chew gum at the same time, fight the republican agenda as well as prepare a plan to fix what the Affordable Care act had. So as to presbyterian ntd it to American People on what we have been able to fix as well as fight against. So i do believe that we could have done Something Better with that. But this week, we listened to the grandiose, strong, affirmative words of our president as he fired comey. And we listened to him speak, and fear, uncertainty, is felt through the bones in our country because he isnt a focused individual. He is very scattered. And its very fearful in the position he holds. Now, i really would like to know what options are there that can secure us that our government is a functioning government so that we do have hope that things will get better, because right now, there is fear there. Well, joe, thanks for the question. [ applause ] and listen. By the way, dont buy this line that democrats dont have ideas on how to make the Health Care System better, right . Were all united around many of them. Add a public option to every Single Exchange so you have a medicare choice inside every exchange. That will make every Single Exchange cost competitive and viable. Allow for medicare to be able to directly negotiate drug prices with the drug industry. That will save this country 50 billion a year every single year. Right . I can go on and on. So this is a republican talking point. The democrats dont have a plan on how to make the Health Care System better. Thats bs. We do. If you want to sit down with us and talk about ways in which we can improve upon the Affordable Care acts, were ready to negotiate with you, but lets be clear about whats happening. The republicans are not talking to us about health care. Not because we dont have zeros but because they have zero interest in our ideas. They want to ram through their version of repeal and devastate, not talk to us about our plans for reform. So this is a great talking point the republicans have. That some democrats have picked up on. But thats just not the reality of how this thing is playing out. Listen, im not going to be able to deliver you the satisfactory message on how we fix all of this without talking about elections. Right . Ultimately, ultimately, right now, republicans control the white house, the house of representatives, and the senate. And they are doing some stuff that is way out of with what the American People want. And while we can grow this activist movement as big and as loud as we can, ultimately, you have to win elections. And we have special elections happening all over the country. We have a midterm happening in 2018. This is not a political rally or meeting, but i just want were going to talk a lot about what we can all do to try to make the next two years turn out as well as we can for us. But ultimately, you have to change the power balance and power dynamic if you want a different result. And everybody that is trying to be part of this movement has to keep an eye towards that as well. Hi. My name is myra. Im from westen. Im a membership chair of ict4. We appreciate very, very much everything you do for us. Trump admitted that he fired comey because of the russian inquiry. Do you consider that to be an obstruction of justice for which the only remedy is impeachment . [ applause ] so, it is always hard to figure out what trump is saying when he speaks. But it certainly appeared in his comments that he was telegraphing that he fired comey because of his conduct in the russia investigation. Of course, he said Different Things on different days about it. Listen, it seems pretty clear this is a part of a pattern of obstructing the ability of the department of justice to get to the truth. Its not just the firing of comey. Its the firing of sally yates. Its the firing of every prosecutor across the country including Preet Bharara in manhattan. I think were going to try to glean some information over the course of the next week to try to better understand what the true motivation of the firing was, what the plans are in the fbi to continue this investigation going, what the commitment of the department of justice is to give the fbi what they need. Again, this happened just a few days ago. We have the Deputy Attorney general coming to the senate in a closeddoor briefing next week in which were going to ask him many of these questions, so its a very, very troubling pattern. Im going to seek to get all the information that i can before i decide what strategy and path to pursue. Hi, thank you senator murphy, for holding the town hall. My name is erin. Im a member of action together connecticut and i live in new fairfield. I also want to thank you for your assistance with the luis barrios immigration case. He was granted a twoyear stay on friday. So thank you, and to all of your staff who assisted with that. My question is, because of an interview i heard on npr yesterday with senator ben sasse that i found unsettling, he seemed to imply that, well, he implied the path to appointing an independent special prosecutor, it would be influenced or the call would be made by the attorney generals office, and i just wanted to get some clarity from you on how what the path forward really is for that. Yeah, well, theres different ways that special prosecutor can be appointed, but its hard for that process to happen outside of the attorney generals office. I mean, lets just be honest. Chuck schumer is not going to be the person that appoints the special prosecutor. Its going to be someone from inside the department of justice that does that. Obviously, we would expect that anyone that does the appointment would do so in consultation with both parties so that theres someone that we truly believe is independent. We would want a commitment that thad individual is going to be given all of the resources that they need. But again, youre back to this original problem, which is that so long as youre operating under a structure in which every branch of the government is controlled by someone that is donald trump or friendly to donald trump, its hard to ever guarantee that complete outside independence. So thats part of what were meeting with the Deputy Attorney general about next week. He said in his confirmation hearing that he would, as the technical head of the russia investigation, given that sessions has recused himself, he would appoint a special prosecutor if the time came when that was appropriate. Well, if this is not the moment, right, then when would that moment be . And so we would obviously want some safeguards and assurances surrounded that appointment, and will be part of our discussion next week. Hello, mr. Senator. I just want to thank you for doing such a wonderful job representing connecticut in the senate. My name is ethan parker. Im fraught westport and im a sophomore in high school. I have a question regarding the Health Care Bill. I know it cleared the house, and even though the republicans have a majority in congress, what specific powers do the house and Senate Democrats have to either radically revise or completely block the Health Care Bill . So as you know, the Senate Republicans have convened a group of 13 men that are all that are they dont have a lot of women to pick from in their caucus, but they do have women republican senators that they could have chosen. They have 13 republican male senators that are meeting secretly behind closed doors to craft their version of a Health Care Reform bill. Ultimately, they can pass pieces of Health Care Repeal with 50 votes. But anything that is not budget related, they cannot pass with 50 votes, they need 60 votes. That does limit what they can do without democratic support. For instance, allowing states to get around the protections for people with preexisting conditions, that is not budget related. So that would need 60 votes in our opinion. I believe that would be the opinion of the parliamentarian as well. There are limits to what they could do, but they could cut in half the subsidies. They could radically transform medicaid with only 50 votes. And you know, they are very concerned about what the political ramifications are. There are some republican senators who actually are approaching this in an intellectually honest way and want to pass something that actually will work. And theyre going to have a devil of a time even coming to that 50 number, never mind the 60 that theyre going to need to do the kind of dramatic, broadbased reform that the house did. Thank you. All right. Lets do a couple more in here and then well go to the room across the street. Okay, thank you, senator. My name is sandy. Im from greenwich, kektd. As an attorney, of course, i am in total agreement with the notion of an independent counsel, but beyond that, as a former official of the department of justice, i am particularly concerned about the politicizing of the department of justice. Without regard to what the president said or what he meant, there are two things that are inescapable. Number one, Jeff Sessions participated in an event from which he was allegedly recused. His nonrecusal recusal. Number two, Rod Rosenstein without regard to what you may think of him, the plain truth is he engaged in or allowed himself to be engaged in a charade to justify the wrongful termination of the head of the fbi as the president later admitted. So my question to you is, given those two facts, why not ask the ig to investigate . The ig at the department to investigate both sessions nonrecusal recusal and rosensteins willing participation in what the president has admitted was a charade. That besmirched the department of justice. [ applause ] well said. Yeah, no, i think thats a worthy idea, and ill give it some thought. Its, of course, a little muddy because sessions recusal is not a recusal under law. Its a, you know, a political commitment that he made, right . It was at the i want to say at the insistence. It wasnt. At the direct and recommendation of the ethics people in the department of justice, which recommendation he allegedly accepted. You cant accept and then renege when its convenient. Well, legally, i mean, again, legally, you can, right . So i think let me think about it because i think that makes a lot of sense. You would have to really think about what standard youre asking the ig to hold either sessions or rosenstein to because youre not talking about legal standards. Youre not talking about statutory standards. All of these expectations that we have for individuals at the highest level of Law Enforcement are often let me make sure i get to other questions here, are often informal ones. If you have seen anything i said on this, i dont disagree with anything you have said, clearly sessions did not recuse himself, if he was weighing in on this decision, and rosenstein, who many of us voted for because he had this reputation as being an independent, honest, straight shooter, clearly wrote a memo that he knew was going to be used to perpetuate a fraud. And hes got to answer for that. Hopefully, as i said, when he appears before us next week, well get some of those answers. Thank you. Hey, senator. Thank you very much for being here. My question is regarding the strength of congress right now. Because im terrified. You know, our democracy is being threatened. Just the core values of it. Liberty, equality, and justice. In every single realm. Donald trump has created instability everywhere. When a citizen is arrested and sentenced to a year in prison for disorderly conflict because she laughed at a conflict hearing, when a reporter is jailed for willful disruption of a process because he pressed a cabinet member for answers, when russian photographers are invited to the oval office while americans are barred. When those who dont pledge loyalty to potus are removed from office, when the independence and integrity of the Justice Department is deemed favorable, and when factions are encouraged within the congressional body to weaken its power by created disunity and confusion, and when potus threatens to cut off the publics access to white house coverage by suspending press coverage, in my mind, hes not making America Great again. Hes making america russia. Or maybe even any of those other dictatorships hes aligning himself with. Hes intentionally seeking to change the system. And hes undermining all the checks and balances that you were talking about earlier today. So what how can you assure us, the American Public, that the strength is there when theres so much disunity and he keeps perpetuating it. Listen, i cant individually assure you of that, i cant. This is a collective exercise. And you know, ultimately, i opened by talking about checks and balances. Your ultimate check here is elections. And heres the flip side. That means at the top of all of our agenda has to be assuring the legitimacy of the electoral process, which is under assault as well, right . So we can one of the ways you can perhaps sleep at night is knowing if the democratic minorities in the house and senate cant stop all of this, at least the American Public, right, who right now register trump at about a 38 approval rating, can stop this in 2018, and then can stop it again in 2020. But thats not true if millions of americans have their right to vote robbed from them. Thats not true if the census doesnt go forward as planned so that we have an accurate count as to who actually should be eligible to vote and who should get representatives in proportional amounts. So i think part of the answer to your question is of all the things we have to spend time thinking about today, making sure that were guardians of free and Fair Elections so that even if we cant stop all of this dangerous slide away from the rule of law in the next year and a half, that we have the ability to rise up the American Public in the election and put their stamp of disapproval on it. So again, none of this is going to be a satisfactory answer. Because we wont be able to stop all of this, but elections are supposed to be your final and most complete check on this dangerous set of precedents youre talking about. [ applause ] all right. I cant tell if we have anybody there. Lets do we have somebody . Okay, somebody from the overflow room. Good froome, senator murphy. My name is susan. Im from stamford, and im with the southwest Regional Mental Health board. I would like to know, and i thank you for waiting and passing the mental Health Care Reform act of 2016. I would like to know if the advanced put forth by that bill will be in jeopardy if the ahca is actually passed . Thank you. So, i mentioned i mentioned a little bit about this earlier. Its such its such an uncomfortable moment because i felt like i was just getting good at the end of 2016, figuring out how to work across partisan lines, how to get big things done with republicans that were good for the country, as was mentioned. I spent all of 2015 and 2016 working on a huge rewrite of the countrys Mental Health laws. I worked with a very conservative senator who has gotten a little press because hes in the middle of the health care debate, bill cassidy, from louisiana. He and i wrote the Mental Health reform act of 2016 which radically changes a lot of our laws surrounding Mental Health care. Maybe in the estmost important way, pushing Insurance Companies to pay for Mental Health care by telling them youre in violation of federal law if youre denying treatments on the Mental Health side when youre not denying them on the physical health side. We think this is going to result in hundreds of millions of dollars in new care being authorized. Yes, the short answer to that question is, of course, its all in jeopardy because the protections in the Mental Health reform act only work if you have insurance. So if 24 Million People lose insurance, which by the way, its sort of difficult to get that your head wrapped around what 24 Million People means because all the numbers seem big these days. Thats the equal equivalent of 17 u. S. States put together. That is 17 u. S. States all losing their health care, right, at one time. And losing their access to the protections that are built into that act. The second risk is that a lot of the things in that act are only work if the administration actually does them. So those provisions that force the Insurance Companies to spend more on Mental Health care, they actually only work if the department of health and Human Services uses the power we gave them to force the Insurance Companies to do it. Now, the good news is that we set up a new position in that act, a new assistant secretary for Mental Health. One person standing next to the commissioner of hhs who is the commander of Mental Health policy in the government. Though trump has not filled 90 of the positions available to him, he did nominate a pretty good person who was trained here in connecticut to be the new assistant secretary of Mental Health who actually seems like shes going to be a pretty strong advocate for the provisions of the bill. So our fingers are crossed that that will stay out of the political crosshairs and well get some of those provisions implemented. Go ahead. Thank you, senator murphy. So sorry for me feel better. My question is about race and senators sessions, we all knew pretty much when he was nominated that he was a racist, and this past week, he has [ applause ] he has basically i dont think so, maam. Were not going to he made a rule at minimum sentences for drug convictions would be mandatory minimum sentences, which again, is a discriminatory practice, so i was wondering what we can do to counteract that, and also, second question which could be what would you like us to do to help you as we move forward in the next two to four years. Thank you. So listen. What senator sessions testified, you know, to us was that he had done and said some things that he regretted in the past. I reserve the right listen, i voted against him. I was, you know, a strong opponent of him, but i reserve the right to believe that people can change, and i dont know that its i dont know that i would characterize him in that simple a set of terms. But i do think that he has policies that he is pushing as attorney general that are deeply, deeply troubling, and there are all these republicans who came out over the last few years and claim that they were for criminal Justice Reform, said that they understood the detriment of minimum mandatory sentences, and yet, you know, crickets from them when sessions comes out and says hes going to start pushing judges to enforce the highest potential punishments under the law. So again, you know, this is something that i wish we did in 2016. We came very close to passing criminal Justice Reform bill that would have limited the power of judges and the department of justice to impose these overly draconian sentences on nonviolent offenders. We werent able to where. I think his announcement means we should double down on the effort and see if we can restart talks to find that bipartisan consensus because its there. There are enough republicans that will vote with us in order to pass Something Like that. So yeah, im not sort of big into name calling. I hope that jeff has changed from who he may have been. And hopefully we can get a Bipartisan Group together to try to pass criminal Justice Reform. Go upstairs. Great. Hi. My name is beth adamson from redding, connecticut. First, i want to thank you not just for being here today but for serving in the role that you serve. I pounded pavement for you. I made phone calls on your behalf. And im proud that you are the person i thought you would be in the senate. [ applause ] in my work, im a pastoral counselor, a leadership consultant, and i run, i started a coalition at the United Nations on behalf of gender equality for girls who are without a doubt the most oppressed people in our planet in just about every country. How difficult is it for me to realize that when we talk about all men are created equal, people just laugh about that . What do i say to girls about that, when we see 13 members of a Senate Committee completely set up with men and not one woman there to talk about issues Like Health Care not one woman to be an expert on the issues of women. How do i talk about that with women and girls not just in our own country but other countries as well. Its incredibly disappointing to me. In the meantime, im an expert on this. I know that those legislative bodies or parliamentary bodies who are far removed from the 50 50 representation that would be a truly equal representation of any country or corporation, for example, the further you are from that, when there are only 10 or 15 or 20 women, which is where we tend to run once we got to 26 , the issues are besmirched by the needs of mens issues. Women stay as mini parties in that, and the women who act more like men are the ones who are more likely to be listened to. The closer it gets to truly 50 50, and this happens across every country, the more likely it is the country will think about infrastructure issues. Will think about whats best for children, will think about whats best for health. It happens over and over again. And yet we are we, who try over and over again to say were a great nation or need to be great again, we ignore that. And i do think it takes, as you say, voting, but it also takes a few good men to say this is important. And given that we are one of the only three or four countries at the United Nations who havent even voted for the convention on rights of women. Yeah. Okay, thank you. Well, thank you for your work. I just share a story with you. I was meeting with a group of awardees from the Carter Center this week, a group of women working in places like kenya and nigeria and pakistan oin empowering women. They wanted to talk to me about jim comey. I thought that was so fascinated. I didnt have time to stay in the meeting for more than five minutes, but i stayed much longer because i was so interested why they wanted to talk to me about jim comey instead of some account at the state department that funded their work. They said were in the business of trying to promote the rule of law, explain why we should move our countries towards a place in which brutal dictators cant get away with anything that they want, and if we dont have the Gold Standard of the United States, if the rule of law starts to slip away here, you know, how can we go about doing our work of empowering women of standing up to people who are trying to eviscerate those norms. So the example we set, its incredibly powerful. Some people say that maybe it doesnt influence the people at the top, but it gives inspiration to the people at the bottom, at the grassroots, who are doing a lot of the organizing work. Hi, thank you, senator. Im roger longman, with a group from westen, and im with a group called ict4. The question ive got for you is really a practical one. Weve got a 5248 senate more or less. Weve got a couple of big issues that were facing. Health care, for one. Weve got the independent investigation for another. I look at you, youre a politician. You have sold yourself, you have done a great job in representing us and in frankly in getting elected. How can you sell a couple of republicans who are already leaning our way on changes, particularly in health care and particularly on the independent investigation . Is there a solution . Do you have a practical way of being that effective salesman to that side . Yeah, thats a good question. Well, we try to do it in a bunch of different ways. Obviously, i have these private conversations all the time with my colleagues. Were trying to explain to them the seriousness of the moment. You know, thats my communication to them this week about the fact that if there is a choice to be made between your party and your republic, youll never regret choosing your republic. We try to make them understand the political consequences of continuing to side with trump, make them understand that you may not be a senator for another term if you continue to oppose what the vast majority of the American People want. In this case, an independent prosecutor. Part of the difficulty is that just thinking about how the senate process works, its not as simple as just convincing two or three republicans to join us. Because that would give you a theoretical working majority, but you actually have to get what you want on the floor of the senate for a vote. And that is very hard to do without the leader of the senate, the majority leader, who controls the agenda of the senate. So without going into the details of it, just because you convince three republicans to support an independent investigator doesnt mean that all of a sudden it becomes law. You need that passed by the house of representatives and you need to get that provision onto the floor of the senate for a vote. Mitch mcconnell, who i think for the time being is not going to be amongst the three that is going to join us, shocker, he has a lot of control about that agenda. So it is very difficult. You would likely have to have well more than three because you would have to create a real tempest within the Republican Caucus that would cause mcconnell to set up a series of things on the floor that would bring that ultimately to a vote. But remember, political gravity still has applied to this administration, right . So Michael Flynn did eventually have to be forced out. Jeff sessions did have to recuse himself. So its not outside of the realm of possibility that as the story continues to unfold, that there will have to be a special prosecutor appointed if we continue to keep the conventional pressure up. That did ultimately work with respect to flynn and sessions. Its not inconceivable that it wouldnt work with respect to the independent prosecutor. Thank you. Margy from stamford, connecticut. I will try to be brief. Aviation is at the cross bar of spoofing and stalking attack. This is a result of two forces, one, the faas converting to open unsecured transmission of Sensitive Data with adsb, and two, the advancements in electronics, crowdsourcing, and the internet, allowing this data to be published to anybody and everybody. In the past, the government, congress has tried to protect the security of this data and the people who are flying in the skies. In sections of the appropriations bill and in the reauthorization of the faa, but this is a global problem and Global Alerts are being raised in business and academic world. Theres a 2020 deadline, a selfimposed deadline by the faa that this must take place, everybody must transmit this Sensitive Data in the open air ways by 2020. This is an artificial deadline. We have seen past examples of what happens when groups go through with artificial deadlines. Take the challenger explosion. Im asking congress, you, and congress to require the secured transmission of this Sensitive Data and to free the faa from this selfimposed deadline and not convert to mandated adsb transmissions until they can be secured. If you can talk to my staff and give us a little more information about it, i would be happy to learn more. I imagine youre talking about a competing priorities on the other side, which is understanding who is flying on planes so we can check that against databases we have of individuals who shouldnt fly and know whos moving from country to country, but obviously, we should require that be done in a secure way. And also, theyre posting on websites, offering to stalk or track an individuals flight or plane and theyre posting flights of military, air force one, special ops flights. Diplomatic flights, Homeland Security flights, putting it up there for everybody to see whos going where. Get the information to us and ill try to learn more about it. Thank you very much. Were going to go to the overflow room. Hi, senator murphy. Good afternoon. Hello. Thank you for coming down to stamford. My name is caitlin. Im from fairfield, connecticut, and im representing one of the many connecticut indivisible groups. Thank you for all oyour advocacy and tenacity in working for all of the American People and leading connecticut as a blue state and as an example for the entire country. With what happened with the ahca passing the house, one of the potential solutions that our group has passed around to other groups and collaborated with is a fivepoint action plan. We decided that we wanted to do this because the last time with the momentum in the house going through and then unfortunately passing, we were waiting for some type of direction, whether that was from a federal level or whether it was from indivisible which many of us are a part of, and we didnt have one. So we would like to offer, with your direction, which you gave, which was the two most important things that we can do as citizens in this country is, a, showing up to our representativess offices and by calling. So we put together this action plan, and you can find it on our website, fairfieldstandingunited under the action item. And its pretty simple. The two main things we want people to walk away with is they can pick up the phone and call five people that live in states that are represented with the republican senators. And we need to convince them to call their representative to vote no. Time is of the essence, so we recognize that. And the move on, which would be number five, im summarizing. Do you have a question because we have a bunch of people . I do have a question. My question is for being a blue state, which we heard you say many times, to protection the aca, what is it that we can do here in connecticut to move forward and to also be advocates for people across the country . So, listen, presence, even in connecticut, it matters. You know, the news of how many people are showing up to my town halls, to jim himes town halls, that spreads outside of connecticut, right . We have republican members, you know, on the border of connecticut in new york who are swing votes on these matters. So presence in connecticut, even though you do feel like youre preaching to the kwoir, it ultimately matters. Participation in National Groups, you know, hooking up with National Groups and giving them support where they have reach into these districts, that helps as well, being a constant presence online, gumming up the works of social media, that helps as well. Yeah, listen, a nice problem to have in that youre not working to convince the seven of us here in connecticut, but im telling you, people notice, even when there are big turnouts happening here in connecticut, in other places. To the extent you can affiliate yourself with other national organizations, that matters, too. And remember, dont i dont want to tread too far into the political here, but remember, theres really important elections coming up here in connecticut. You know, dont take for granted the fact that connecticut is going to in unison resist all of these policies. You need to make sure that you have local officials and you are sending people to hartford that are going to be active in the resistance to some of the most reckless parts of this policy. And thats not something to be taken for granted. So dont think that just because you have seven people in the federal delegation who by and large are with you on this, that theres no need to have a lot of really active conversations and be politically active here in connecticut. So should we go up there . Lets go up there. Hi, senator murphy. My name is Brooke Kessler and im from westport and im a junior in high school. So from the way in which congress is set up, i know representatives are focused on obtaining immediate results rather than longterm ones. Put the mike near your mouth. Straight into the mike. So from the way in which congress is set up, i know representatives are focused on obtaining immediate results with a desire to get reelected. How do you and fellow members of Congress Plan to combat longterm problems such as Climate Change and education reform in which the solutions will take longer than a senate or house term . Good question. Thank you very much for being here. Thank you for caring. So well, as you know, the senate is supposed to be designed to have a little more of a longer term view than the house of representatives. Theres nothing wrong with worrying about reelection, right . We want every republican in the house of representatives to worry about their reelection right now. And i think this is one of the most fascinating questions in a sort of democratic theory because you often hear people saying, oh, all these members of Congress Care about is reelection. As if thats a bad thing, right . Youre actually supposed to be doing the things that your constituents wants so theyll vote for you for reelection. But youre also right that there are some times decisions you have to make that may have a shortterm consequence but have a longterm gain. And thats one of the hardest questions of representitation. Im not confronted with it every day, but probably every month im confronted with one of those decisions. A place where maybe my constituents arent with me right now, but i know its the right thing to do with respect to generational change. So thats i dont think theres any good way to answer that in the absolute. Every sort of single time youre confronted with one of those decisions, you have to weigh, right . Sho shortterm necessity against longterm benefit. On Climate Change, its not a long term short term problem. This is a shortterm immediate crisis, and that [ applause ] and i can tell you a story about the civil war and syria through the prism of Climate Change, right . The idea that over a course of time, several severe droughts occurred in syria that were no doubt connected to Climate Change, forcing millions of farmers to leave rural areas, concentrate themselves inside urban areas, creating a capacity for services that the regime couldnt meet, resulting in a frustration with that regime that spilled into revolution. Thats a story of Climate Change, creating instability. Thats a Current Crisis that were dealing with today. Its not a simple as the Climate Change story in syria, but thats a big part of that story. So weve got to sell Climate Change not as a longterm problem with shortterm detriment, we have to talk about it as a problem that is immediate that if we solve comes with shortterm gain and not shortterm pain. I appreciate the question. It does often come up in the way you framed. Stamford. I would like to know, senator murphy, if you would be able to share your priorities in terms of tax reform, including expanding the earned income tax credit. At the last town hall, i learned and i was very relieved that the republicans, because the earned income tax credit has to do with people who work, that republicans actually support it. So, i mean, my theory of the case on tax reform is that any tax reform should accrue to the benefit of the big middle slice of america, not the trickledown tax policy has been proven to not work over and over and over again. And that when youre choosing what to tax and what not to tax, you should be taxing stuff that you dont want and you should be not taxing things you want, right . So if you dont want carbon, you should tax that. If you do want corporations to locate inside the United States, you shouldnt tax that. So you should have a conversation about whats you want, what you dont want. And build your tax policy upon it as a foundation. You should just understand that the data very clearly tell ayou that if you concentrate your tax cut on the top 1 or 2 of americans, it is not going to ultimately flow down to everybody else in the way that folks believe it will. And then i think youve got to bring in a conversation about the way in which we tax Investment Income today. This is a very different world today. We treat Capital Gains very differently than we do ordinary income. That comes from a time in which when people made an investment, they held it for a pretty substantial period of time. Now, when you make an investment, by and large, you hold it for a short period of time. Often, that investment is not in the american economy. Its in a foreign economy. We should start asking tough questions about whether we should have such a differentiation in the inve investment of tax income, which accrued to the benefit of wealthy people versus ordinary income. That might have made sense at a time when Capital Gains came from investments that were mainly made in america, mainly made for longterm investment purpshs. This is a different moment today. I think those would be amongst the principles i would bring to a conversation about tax reform. Senator, thanks for being here. A couple political questions. I know its early. What odds would you give the house, the democrats in the house, of getting sizable returns in 2018 and for the Democratic Senators to hold the line, and how seriously are you thinking of running for president in 2020 . My body cant even sustain being a United States senator, as it turns out. Never mind doing anything bigger than that. No, i am really happy being a United States senator. I dont have any plans to run for president. I have a reelection to work through, two years from now. I hope people in connecticut will give me the chance to do this job for another six years. I think the chances are very good that democrats could win back control of the house of representatives. Given the sort of trajectory of where things are heading today, i just dont understand how republicans can walk into a Midterm Election with Something Like the American Health care act around their necks and think that theyre going to be able to survive, never mind being, you know, fairly universally supportive of our president who probably will not be above the low 40s in terms of approval rating. The way the districts are drawn, do not help democrats. We have to have a broader conversation about the political gerrymandering thats happened in this country. [ applause ] and we should have that conversation for two reasons. One, because right now, political gerrymandering accrues to the benefit of republicans. There are a lot of states that just have drawn districts so that republicans get as many seats as possible. But we should also have the conversation because it accrues to the detriment of the General Health of our democracy because we have so few swing districts, like this one, the fourth district, and so many districts full of just democrats or just republicans that theres very little incentive for big parts of the house of representatives to actually cooperate and talk to each other. So i think the chances are good. Maybe i would put them a little better than 50 50 today that you take back the house. The senate is tougher. The senate of the 48 democrats, 25 of them are up for reelection. So in the senate, there just arent as many competitive seats that we can contest. So im going to try to take a few why dont we take one more from every im going to try to take one more from every place and then get out of here. All right, short. So there, there, there. And there. So whoever is standing at the microphone at all four spots, well take those questions and i gotta book. Mine is really short. Yeah. The Cassidy Collins Health Care Bill thats in the works now, i wanted to know if youre familiar with it and what your thoughts are . I really like both of those people individually, but their bill stinks. Bill cassidy, i dont have a better friend on the republican side than bill. What their bill says, what they claim their bill does is to allow for states who want to keep the Affordable Care act to keep it and for states that dont want it to get rid of it. Practically, that simply does not work because, you know, there already is a pretty massive transfer of resources from states that havent done the Medicaid Expansion to states that have done the Medicaid Expansion. But if you deconstructed all of the subsidies in republican states and maintained them in democratic states, it would be an even bigger shift of money from red states to blue states that would be unsustainable. You couldnt keep that together because a Republican Congress would never support continuing to fund a law that only sent subsidy dollars into states that had democratic governors and democratic legislatures. From a practical standpoint, it doesnt work. Their bill is silent with respect to what happened to the taxes, which is kind of a fatal flaw in the bill. What would happen under their premise for their taxes in the bill is would people only in the states that maintained the Affordable Care act pay the taxes . And how would that how would you administer a system . Theres no other tax administered at the federal level that applies to only some states and no other states. Just as a practical matter, it doesnt work. I applaud them for trying to solve a problem that addresses some of the concerns those of us who represent states who want to keep the Affordable Care act with improvements, but lugistically, it falls apart. My name is lindsey. Im from greenwich and here representing indivisible greenwich. Im going to ask the audience to help me. And you stand up if you have a preexisting condition or someone in your family has a preexisting condition. That means if anybody in your family has ever been sick before, right . Good for you if youre gnaw standing. Can you please promise all of us you wont compromise benefit or coverage for anyone currently eligible for the aca . Yes. I have one last thing. Theres a special election june 6th for kevin kiley for fairfield. Wait a second. We have a special election. You talked about it. Its really important. We have a special election june 6th in fairfield. We really need help. Its kevin kiley for fairfield. Kevin kiley for fairfield on facebook. We really need help. Phone banking and canvassing, so special elections really important, june 6th. Please come help. All right. Hello, senator murphy. My name is richard. My family and i, we live in weston. Got up to ask you a question about health care. But i think particularly with the last question, you know, that concern, you have addressed that concern very, very clearly. I want to skip, without any preparation, to asking you about something else. That is having to sdoo with judicial appointments. Just recently, after judge gorsuchs seating in the Supreme Court, in a seat which i can say i think with very good argument was stolen from president obamas nominee, merrick garland, i dont even know. I havent had a chance to do research, but i dont even know if youre on the Judiciary Committee and had a chance to weigh in on judge gorsuchs nomination. But again, risking launching a fishing expedition, what can we as citizens do to oppose judicial nominations we find really offensive, and how can we support the representatives such as yourself who most likely would take a strong stand against them . Okay, lets take this last one here and ill answer them together. So take the last one from the short one from the overflow room. Hi, im from stamford. Im currently a high school sophomore, and i have profoundly admired your commitment to furthering progressive causes, for advocating for equality to promulgating a sensible foreign strategy and military assault rifles. I was deeply overjoyed upon seeing your victory in the 2012 general election against linda mcmahon, an individual who has exercised an blat ntd disregard for the well being of the workers of her former enterprise, wwe, and has allowed the nation totlevise her intolerance. I was baffled when you publicly endorsed her, some who epitomizes the opposite of the ideals you have defended since the beginning of your career, and subsequently voted in favor of her vote. Can you explain the reasons for voting for her confirmation and possibly more important, is it true that you keep diet mountain dew in your coffee cup at every morning meeting . That is true. Okay. Let me do these quickly. Both good questions. So on judicious confirmations, listen, i voted against gorsuch, so i was not on the Judiciary Committee, but i voted against gorsuch on the floor, ultimately, i think hes going to be the most conservative of all nine. I think hes got some radical views on judicial precedent that could really unravel a lot of the protections that we have against the Supreme Court whol independent political entity. And the next fight is going to be even bigger. To the extent that kennedy or ginsburg do create a vacancy, then thats really the swing of the court. And we are going to have to have a just tempest across the country to stop a justice from replacing somebody like kennedy or ginsburg. On mcman, yeah, listen, so i, as many of you know, we supported linda mcman to be spa administrator. Listen, i think we fought obviously very tough, hard campaigns against her. I obviously disagree with her deeply on a lot of the views she has. Its a question of sort of what our test is when were voting on these nominees. Heres the test that ive chosen to employ. Im not going to vote for nam knees for any position in the Trump Administration for people that i believe are truly radical in their views or people that have no experience in the agency or the portfolio that theyre going to oversee. And applying that test to linda mcman as much animosity as we had for each other in that campaign, she does have experience and i dont believe that shes radical in the way that somebody like scott pruitt or judge gorsuch are radical. Its a difficult thing. We do end up voting for people for these positions where we have deep political disagreements. But ultimately, i worry about a senate in which every republican in the senate votes against anybody a democratic president ever puts up and vice versa. Im not sure how you ultimately unwind that. Every single one of these are tough calls. You presented a lot of the most important issues here. And im learning constantly about how to best fight against this reckless agenda, about what issues to prioritize on a daily basis. That is the biggest part of this job is just sort of understanding how to spend the 16 hours that you have every day while youre awake. And every single time i do Something Like this i think i get a little bit better, i think i refine my priorities a little bit more. Again, i just feel so lucky to have this job. And i do ultimately believe that this is a test for this country. Were not going to win every single one of the skirmishes inside the broader battle. But i think well win more than you think as long as youre committed to keeping this level of activism up every single day that youre a part of the fight. So thank you very much, everybody. Appreciate it. Donald trump is getting ready to travel. The president leaves this friday, may 19th, and will head to saudi arabia, israel and rome where hell visit the vatican before going to brussels for a nato meeting. Hell end his trip in sicily, italy, for the g7 summit. Tonight on the communicators, a look at small town and Rural Broadband with shoirly bloomfield, the Rural Broadband association. She talks about her organizations desire for Rural Broadband expansion to become a greater priority within the Trump Administration. Shes interviewed by Communications Daily Senior Editor david count. What you would say your biggest priorities right now either in congress or at the fcc . How do we make sure that broadband is considered part of any infrastructure package that is considered . I look at it. I think, you know, super highways of future . It is really about broadband. Its the ability to do the tele working and public safety, education, telemedicine, all the initiatives that really keep our country robust can really be derived from broadband. How could we make sure they see infrastructure beyond a road and bridge . Watch the communicators tonight. We need physicians and other Health Professions that are competent and problem solvers, life long learners, who are team leaders, consensus builders, indeed who are Business Managers and who can share power constructively and gracefully. I would just hope that you would understand what this responsibility means. That it means reaching out. It means caring about more than yourself. It means asking about we rather than me. Have the fortitude to do the right thing, not the easy thing. Dont be somebodys lap dog and have the courage to spet truth even when it is unpopular. I want to talk with you about being open to the unexpected. About making room for the improbable and the unlikely. Past commencement speeches from the cspan Video Library and join us for this years commencement speeches as we hear from politicians, Business Leaders and white house officials. Starting at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on saturday, may 20th, the 27th, the 29th, memorial day, and june 3rd on cspan and cspan. Org. The middle east policy council hosted a discussion recently on u. S. Saudi efforts to combat terrorism. Panelists included the saudi ambassador to the United Nations, a saudi Counter Terrorism expert, and a former u. S. Ambassador to saudi arabia. They talked about president trumps upcoming visit to saudi arabia, the relations with gulf countries and spreading extremist views. This is an hour and 50 minutes. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining us to day for this important and i believe ve