tv Washington Journal Gabby Morrongiello and Mike Lillis Discuss the Week... CSPAN March 27, 2017 9:30pm-10:25pm EDT
making u.s. businesses competitive where we have a very high business tax rate. we are able to take the tax code and redesign things. ian read: pfizer ceo on pharmaceutical cost. >> we do need to reform the health care, the way it is delivered and the consequences will be re-patients. and scott pruitt on environmental policy. >> there are some exciting things going on with respect to clean coal technology and in the nuclear space. most of that is happening in europe because of the disincentives we put into place in this country with respect to nuclear. if you hear about these environmental concerns, nuclear should be in the next. these are available --c-span.org or by focusing
searching the library. reporters up next to talk about the relationship between the white house and congress. from washington journal, this is 55 minutes. >> for a monday round table the week ahead in washington we are joined by gabby from the washington examiner and michael liles. how much of the weekend is going to be looking back on the field health care vote. e: it is not going to be the next few weeks, it is going to be the next few months until they can find a replacement for this law. this is the central promise of the trump campaign and the central promise of paul ryan in 2010. this will not be forgotten. -- it was shocking and
humiliating for the republicans to go out and say all you have to do is give us unified government, give us the white house and we can finally get this thing done and in the first pass of they could not do it. they have to get back to the drawing board and have a new strategy settlement for health care that everything they want to do on the agenda. >> in your coverage of this he talk about members wanted to go back to work this week on health care. who are those members? the conservatives who said all along we need to repeal this law and the leadership moving forward did not do that. we've been promising to repeal, let's go back and repeal. why did we abandon that strategy now? which speaks to the difficulty of crafting legislation instead of just taking something down. for many years they have the privilege to pass a repeal law base andgoing to their
knowing it would never be signed by president obama. now they have an opportunity with trump in the white house to sign these things but it is their responsibility to come up with a plan that is not going to destroy the health care system in the process. >> how quickly can republicans turned to this if they want to? >> the smart thing would be to continue to work on this. it is harder to get the health care through the reconciliation process and turning to tax reform. i think that as you were mentioning, conservatives are going to want to stay on this for the foreseeable future. to hit the wise first campaign promise president trump made on the campaign was to repeal and replace obamacare instead of saying we will come back to this at some point hopefully before the 2018 midterm elections.
it would be wise for them to stay on this and certainly can say to republicans and all the people who voted for the president and devoted to put a congressional republican majority into congress that they can get things done. that they have a congressional majority and they can work together and pass things. if they can't get health care done it is going to be difficult for them to do tax reform our infrastructure going forward. >> we talked about the three-step process for health care reform, american health care act was the first step. side?bout the regulatory can they move ahead without the first step being done? >> having mick mulvaney or tom graves -- tom price looking at what they can do in the budget besides placing a compliment health care repeal bill. that is something we may expect
going forward just as the white house can say we accomplish something. it may not be a full repeal or replace but at least we're making progress on eliminating key parts of the obamacare framework. >> we are covering waterfront this morning in the week ahead. 748 -- 8000. independence 748, 8002. mike, george gorgeous -- judge gorsuch is getting his votes today. any surprises? >> at this point it is breaking down potters and lines with a few exceptions. a few republicans are unanimous in their support for him and democrats are getting a lot of pressure from political groups to oppose him is only symbolically. i think reading the tea leaves everyone thinks that he will be
approved. block thecan try to process but there's nothing they can do to block in the end. some democrats are saying that we want filibuster neil gorsuch if you allow us to use that process the next time around. they're anticipating something may happen every next 3.5 years and the republicans will have the opportunity to put someone else in there. the republicans will say no way for obvious reasons. >> that's my question for gabby morrongiello. what reasons would republicans have to take up this a deal? >> it would be unwise for them to do that, to allow democrats to block a potential second supreme court nominee at some point in the future. what happened here with senator chuck schumer saying we will try to filibuster neil gorsuch as a theyme court nominee,
could not build a constitutional case against him. if you look at the hearings that took place last week, there were not any moments of that stood out where democrats were able to nail down something that could be controversial. i did not see any of that take place last week in the hearings. i think this strategy now is to get republicans to bring back the nuclear option or get the democrats to come over. >> the nuclear option, what that involves, -- gabby: -- the filibuster means that you have to have 60 votes in the senate to pass anything. mitch mcconnell used it endlessly when he was minority leader.
it is a way to prevent the majority from rolling over the majority. you take the power away from the minority and you can pass by a simple majority like you do in the house. yet ryman the house, you have mcconnell in the senate. and they can rim things through donald trump's desk and have been passed that way. it is extremely controversial because you said a president like that and two years, four years, six years you're in the minority and democrats will not soon forget that. it is more political calculation. doing want to take that controversial step and set the president knowing we will be the minority in the future and the democrats are going to point to that. talking to two reporters who cover it all. they're going to ask your best answer your questions for the next 45 minutes.
in maryland, republican, nicholas. >> i just want to make a comment about branding because i think perhaps a lot of the republican base were more interested in defeating something called obamacare, they were more concerned about the obama portion of the obamacare package rather than the actual substance of what was in obamacare. i think now the republicans so to speak have to rely on it because it is a mess and they have no way to really replace it. to respond that, you have to hit it on the head area this was a branding nightmare for republicans because of the last six years they have been talking about repealing and replacing obamacare but what this battle
really exposed was there is a fundamental difference between moderate republicans and conservative republicans about how they want to take health-care reform. if you look at what the house freedom caucus was fishing for last week, it was vastly different from what more moderate republican lawmakers were pushing for. that is something they will have to overcome. to your second point, i think there is an issue in this battle, that a lot of republicans have spoken about repealing obamacare and wanting to, but then they realized that there are popular parts of obamacare, like the pre-existing conditions clause and allowing individuals to remain on their parents' health plan. that would be a public relations nightmare if they repealed those. that something they have to deal with going forward. host: mike lillis, front page of the "washington times" has a question asking whether speaker ryan is the fall guy amid this failed effort last week. does he have any reason to have
concerns about his support within the conference? guest: if you listen to the statements coming out of the conference, the answer is no. but he is going to have some problems, for sure. this is the same dilemma that john boehner was in. a year and a half ago, john boehner was facing the freedom caucus, and they had about the same numbers, about 40 people. the math has not changed, even on the name above the speakers office has. he will face the same trouble with this group. they do not like to compromise. they came here to dismantle things, to cut deficits, and they are going to stick to their guns, no matter who is in the white house. it will be an enormous problem for paul ryan. in many ways, this accentuated the favor that john boehner did for paul ryan. when he came in, he cut a couple deals with president obama. he raised the debt ceiling and set spending caps, and it kind
of greece the skids for paul ryan through the entirety of last year and 2015. everybody said the honeymoon was over for paul ryan in 2015, but it was over in 2016. it does not bode well for their agenda moving forward. this is the first legislative fight he had to go to the that for and he lost. they have to come up with a new strategy. that is his burden. host: one or two callers said they want speaker ryan to go after what happened last week. bobby is a democrat in belton, missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. my first thing about getting this thing fixed is by putting a cap on the insurance companies where people make $30,000 or less they $300 for singles, $500 for families, and put a cap on the medications where you cannot charge no more for the pill, five times what it takes to make
them. and the obamacare would have worked all right if they would have put exchanges in all the states like they were supposed to, but the republicans hate having a black man in the office and did everything they could to make this thing go down the hill. host: why is it about race? student recruitment policy -- as opposed to disagreement over policy. caller: because i think the gop a racists. i do not call the republicans racists. it is the people at the very top, those who make all the money, control all the businesses. so medicare, we paid into that. i have three more years before i get on medicare. my mom has it, and it is excellent. host: all right. that is his situation. gordon is in wyoming, republican. caller: good morning.
i think each individual should practice preventive health the best we can. i am 71, and i have a personal responsibility to take the best care of myself that i can. that is all i have got. thank you. host: gabby morrongiello, anything from this last two calls? guest: i think it gets to what we are facing, the political climate that we are in right now. you could not have two more different takes on the direction in which we should take health care reform and the feelings toward both parties. like gordon was mentioning, the personal responsibility aspect of health care, this goes back to what the freedom caucus was arguing last week, the government should not be involved in the health care industry, and if they are, it should be a limited role, up to the individual to take care of themselves and purchase the health plan that they think is the most fitting for them and their family.
it is a fight that will wage on, i am sure, between both parties and possibly the common interest parties. host: republicans in the president say they want to move -- republicans and the president say they want to move on to tax reform. what will be the role of the freedom caucus in that upcoming effort? >> they have flexed their muscles and proved if they unite as a block, they can dismantle anything they want. they can prevent even the republicans from passing something in a chamber, a body, the house, where they control, have a 44-seat advantage. it is remarkable they cannot pass this repeal law. looking at taxes for him, it is -- looking at tax reform it is , fair to say that all republicans support tax cuts, so this should be an easy lift. you have brady going on the sunday shows and on the cable shows this week saying this is where we should have started and
this is where we really unite as a group. we thought the united is a group behind repealing obamacare, and that did not go so well either. for the tax code, tens of thousands of pages, and every page has a lobbyist group with some skin in the game. this is not going to be an easy fight and infrastructure is not going to be an easy fight. why the lossason of don't pass on these things for decades at a time and they have picked all of them. host: thoughts on the congressman ted poe announcing over the weekend he will be leaving the freedom caucus? guest: it is surprising. he was a critical but also supportive of the health care bill. to see the group he has been a part of investor so much effort into blocking that was certainly frustrating for him. that is a loss for them.
it will be interesting to see if there is a further exodus of members of the freedom caucus going forward on fights like immigration, tax reform, anything that comes out, whether there is rift inside the freedom caucus. not just in the republican party. host: have you heard about anybody else wanting to leave the freedom caucus? mike: i have not. it was just so over the weekend. there is certainly frustration within leadership and in the white house, as well. we will see if there is any backlash there. one of the most important things that came out of this debate, the most important message we are taking away as we are covering this, is that i think trump thought he could come into congress from the white house and kind of bully lawmakers into supporting his agenda, no matter what the policy was. he kind of had his way during the primaries with these guys. he is the president, right? so that strategy worked. he learned quickly that it is
not going to work, at least with this block of republicans. they will not be a rubber stamp. they will be a thorn in his side. unless he starts listening to them on policies. host: let's go to kentucky. jim is a democrat. caller: i would like to direct my comment to both against who -- i appreciate their comments on the fact that the republicans who have problems getting other things past -- p assed if they cannot get the health care passed, i would be willing to disagree with both of you when it comes to the tax cuts for the corporations and the billionaires and millionaires. it will sail through within three weeks time. thank you, i appreciate your comment. gabby: well, i think that there is going to be a lot of issues that republicans are going to face when it comes to tax reform. you have already seen signals from congressmen meadows, chairman of the house freedom caucus, saying he disagrees with
gop leadership on whether they should offset tax cuts using taxes on imports. there is already a rift taking place, and i do not think there will be a significant -- i do not think there will be unanimous agreement on anything going forward. it will be a lengthy process to get tax reform through. >> faultlines you are already seeing on tax reform? mike: the bill you saw fail on the floor is in many ways a tax bill. this was written largely by paul ryan. at least his mark is on it. this is paul ryan's brain child. you can see elements of that in the tax cuts. it was a $600 billion tax-cut for the millionaires and billionaires in many cases. to say all you have to do is put those provisions into a bill and it will sail through is not quite true, because we just saw that fail.
the other thing is there was a large cut to medicaid, which ryan has proposed for many years in his budget. from the democratic side, their criticism was this was never supposed to be a health care bill that eroded coverage. it raised costs in many cases. it cut medicaid for low income people. they said this is not a health care bill, it is a tax bill that is for rich people giving to republicans. and set aside a paul ryan's long-held desire to cut entitlement programs like medicaid. paul ryan'sd long-held desire to cut entitlement programs like medicaid. host: rockport, texas, richard, independent. caller: before the election, they were going to have the bill on friday. i was watching a competing media show. and a new york congressman was being asked about universal health care, and he was really shouting it down. and then this --
host: what congressman and what show? caller: it was a new york congressman, and this was actually on cnn. chris cuomo read a quote from a book, and it was trump. he was promoting universal health care, ok? obama, when he was started to run for president, was talking about universal health care, and then he switched to insurance, mandated insurance for everybody. ok? you will always get a lot of shout back from elected have the benefit of being paid off by lobbyist from the insurance business and also receiving public health care at everybody else's expense. to me, there is a simple solution to get rid of high premiums, high deductibles, and it is just a discussion subject. it is simple and probably the
fairest because everybody would be paying into this, and it would be to tax food. gabby: i want to speak to the first part of your comment about the comments that president trump made years ago on health care, because i think this is one reason that there is speculation that possibly he could turn to democrats and try to get a bipartisan bill through on health care. if you heard his comments last week on friday, after the bill was pulled from the house, he mentioned that now we will have democrats start to come to us once obamacare starts to crumble. if you look at president trump, he has never been seen as an ideologue. he is definitely willing to work the aisle and collaborate with democratic lawmakers because he does not hold true to conservative principles in terms of ideology.
i think that is something we might be able to see on health care but not so much on immigration or taxes. but if there is ever an opportunity for this president, this white house, to reach across the aisle and work with democratic lawmakers, health care to possibly be that, simply because of the intraparty battle we saw take place last week and the week to four. -- and the week before. host: palm bay, florida, republican. good morning. caller: thank you for answering my questions. i do not believe in conspiracy theories. how much of a chance is it that this was plan to go this way? it was said that president trump should let it go down and crash and burn. he would be health care insurance executive and next october, and one of the state only have one insurer on the
plan. maybe there won't be any in these dates and maybe the congress really got caught off guard like everybody else that mrs. clinton was supposed to win. they really did not have a plan yet. although mr. ryan tried to go back to sausage makers -- in eight years, we really have not had sausage making. committee hearings on c-span that let the people what is going on. he only brought it to the committee. if they would've spent another bus and got what was in a good public, pros and cons of both sides, it might have gone through but i think mr. trump wanted this off the plate, let obamacare collapsed a little more and then maybe get some good legislation. >> this was one big long game.
mike: the comments that you reference to their from trump they have been happening. the first time they came up was at the republican retreat in philadelphia where everyone had gathered. they said we will come up with a strategy for repeal and replace. trump got there and he surprised a lot of lawmakers when he's dead the best thing we can do politically would be to let this thing fail. one that is the message coming from the white house, i think it was disheartening going into this fight and i think it did not help. it is safe to say that donald trump hates losing. he doesn't want to go to the podium and say we failed. i think the humiliation this week is not going to be easy for
him and to see how he reacts to that is going to be something else. i just think they did not going to this fight thinking, yes, we want this thing to fail. they very much wanted a victory. they had been promising it for too long. they won the house in the senate based on this argument. they won the house based on this argument. for them to fail so magnificently i do not think was the plan at all. host: 8:30 here on the east coast. we are talking about the week ahead in washington, various issues on both ends of pennsylvania avenue. gabby morrongiello is our guest from the "washington examiner," and mike lillis of "the hill" newspaper. we want to talk about the russian interference in the election and ties with russia. what will you be looking for this week when it comes to that story? guest: i think the point we are at right now is continuing to look for any evidence that may emerge to support the president's claims that the
previous administration had ordered surveillance on him and his campaign associates and whether they were, in fact, tied to concerns about ties to russia and russian officials. you saw the chairman of the house intelligence committee last week make an extraordinary move to go to the white house after receiving some form of information that he felt substantiated the president's claims and to bring that information to the president. and i think the feeling right now and the request from not just the public but other lawmakers is to actually have some insight into what that information may have been and whether there is more to come this week, which some republican lawmakers have certainly looked into that. host: a headline this morning looking at the actions of mr. nunes. it has sparked criticism. should he be worried at this point? guest: i don't think so. he has the full support of ryan and the republican leadership.
the criticism he is getting is from democrats, near universal from democrats. john mccain went on one of the cable shows and said this is an indication that congress has no credibility doing this investigation on its own. there are some republicans who have been critical of him. for the most part, he has the support of his colleagues on the republican side of the aisle. that being said, he was very quick to apologize on thursday morning. it was a remarkable press conference. it was on wednesday. it was called very hastily. he read a statement and did not seem to know how to answer the questions. he contradicted himself numerous times taking questions from reporters. then to run to the white house and informed the president of information from the investigation of the president, essentially, without telling the other investigators was quite a remarkable step. i think there was a little bit of egg on his face and he was
backtracking. in terms of his gavel, i think he is safe. host: will the democrats try to push that this week? guest: they want the information. part of the apology on thursday was, yes, i will make available the information i have seen. friday morning, those democrats went into the committee room to look at it, they were promised it and it was not there. of course, they are making political hay out of all of this, and it gives them some into attack endlessly until he -- something to attack endlessly and until he comes up with that information. they will not be quiet. an interesting thing, when he was reading the statement, he said this is incidental information from common foreign surveillance operations, and members of trump's transition team, who i have identified, even though their names were not there.
some of the speculation was, well, you were a member of the transition team, so did you recognize yourself in the course of looking at these documents? it is kind of a parlor game at this point. it will continue until he reveals information. host: we will look for it this week. back to the phones. david from maryland, independent. caller: good morning, c-span. thank you for taking my call, and thank you for the guests. there are a lot of topics today. i will speak on the latest one as far as president trump. i think it shows a lack of leadership and a lack of judgment for him to say, oh, well, let's let obamacare die by itself. it shows he does not care about
the american people and does not care about -- he does not really show good leadership. something is wrong. everybody knows obamacare needs fixing. but their answers to throw it out. that is because a lot of times they have an agenda or whatever, but overall, you should be thinking about the american people. they don't think about the american people. that is why americans are so frustrated. 3 million more people voted not to throw the obamacare out because they voted for hillary clinton. his answer to that and everything else is to bring whoever to say, oh, 3 million illegals voted, even though he does not have proof.
i think he is showing poor leadership in many areas. and the polarization of the congress, the fact that we cannot compromise on hardly anything, that is the real problem. we used to be able to come together, like on an infrastructure bill or something like that, because we knew they was going to create jobs. but they cannot do it because they have agendas, and they are not thinking about the american people. they are thinking about their own ideology am a rather than -- rather than coming together. host: one of the groups president trump blamed for the defeat of the health care effort is the freedom caucus. the chairman was on abc's "this week" yesterday. here is what he said. [video clip]
>> this is not the end of the debate. i had one friend call me the other day and say it is like saying that tom brady lost at halftime. you know, we may be in overtime, but i can tell you, at the very end of the day, the most valuable player will be president trump on this because he will deliver. he is committed to the american people. host: gabby morrongiello, how much of a valuable player will mark meadows be in the road ahead? guest: he is someone president trump will want to have a solid relationship with. he needs to be in constant contact with speaker ryan and also with chairman meadows, because as the freedom caucus demonstrated last week, they are going to be a powerful force. they are not going to be rubberstamped, as mike said, for this administration and on a
number of issues coming up in the next 50 days at the next year. i anticipate they will continue to push that can push for conservative reforms that the president might not be inclined to pursue. host: mike lillis, does president trump build that relationship with a tweet like this one from yesterday? democrats are smiling nbc. guest: it does not help his relationship with the freedom caucus or mark meadows. he suffered a loss. he does not like to be humiliated, so he will poke back. one thing we learned is that donald trump will not back down from a fight, even if it is with fellow republicans. you will see that back and forth, but meadows obviously wants to mend some fences. yet, he has an agenda. he came here for a reason. he wants to get policy things done. important to remember that it was not just the conservatives who sunk this thing. it was the centrist group, this tuesday group, this group of moderates. interesting enough, they all voted for repeal in past years, but when it came to repealing the actual parts of it they
might have become law, they said, well, wait a minute, and these are some of the benefits gabby mentioned earlier, saying this would be too much harm to our constituents, some from herbal states and some in districts where hillary clinton won the election in november. -- purple states, and some are in districts where hillary clinton won the election in november. they have their constituents in mind. this goes back to it the last caller said, that trump and republicans do not care about their constituents. but a lot of them were looking at the playing field and saying if i vote for this thing, medicaid goes. my republican governor wants that money from the federal government. my constituents need it. so they voted against it, as well. so it was also these moderates. they were looking at their constituents. host: about 20 minutes left with our roundtable. debbie is in flint, michigan, a
democrat. caller: good morning. i love c-span. for the record, i am not a silly liberal or a stupid democrat. i have been referred to as both on your program this morning, so i will not be calling republicans names. it will be more political theater this week, more bait and switch, more painting of democrats with the brush that makes us look like idiots. donald trump has made it clear that he does not think he is our president. he made one little statement in the state of the union address, and since then he has put down democrats at every point. and he is our president, too. he needs to realize that now you are done running, and you now represent democrats, too. pull your head out of your proverbial fannie and wake up. host: the chief of staff saying yesterday that there might be some opportunity to reach out to democrats when it comes to health care.
guest: not just health care but on a number of issues. he has demonstrated that he is willing to reach across the aisle. he brought in the ranking chairman of the house oversight committee, a staunch opponent of this administration, a few weeks ago to talk about pharmaceutical drug prices. he has brought in the congressional black caucus. he has reached out to democrats throughout the course of his administration so far. he seems willing, and this goes back to the fact that president trump is more pragmatic than ideological, to reach across the aisle, to cut deals. as you said, he is the consummate dealmaker. i think that is something he factors into politics. it is not like business, but if you can find a partner across the aisle willing to negotiate with you, that is an opportunity that this president would uniquely reach for on any issue.
host: surprised that the president chose the congressional black caucus as a place to look for those partnerships? guest: nothing surprises me anymore about the administration. i am done making predictions. he promised to do that on the campaign trail. we have seen that he is trying to go down that list and check all the boxes and do the things he promised. a lot of people appreciate that. now the question is, cummings goes into the white house, the black caucus goes into the white house, and there is no love lost between trump and the black caucus, especially since the president went after john lewis, civil rights hero. there is a lot of tension there, a lot of friction. there will be a healing process, i think, especially when trump has supported things like obamacare repeal.
the question going forward, is there going to be any kind of alliance between black caucus, or the democrats more generally, and this president? a lot of that will depend on how much trump is going to go to the mat to get these things on the floor. the prescription drug benefit, the medicare benefit, right now does not allow medicare to negotiate drug prices. for years, democrats have thought that was a mistake. paul ryan is opposed to it. mitch mcconnell is opposed to it. donald trump is for it. he is is that rare republican who wants to do that but to get that to the floor -- he does not control congress, so he will have to find a way to use the bully pulpit. he will get the support of the democrats, but he cannot bring it to the floor by himself. the interesting thing will be how willing he is to go to the mat and call out his own party leaders to bring legislation to the floor.
host: line for republicans, good morning. caller: i am kind of tired of listening to this crap about there is not enough money. we have a military that is 10 times bigger than anybody else. now we going to spend $54 billion on a new weapon system, f-35, and then we talk about -- one year i made a huge amount of money, and i found out how much people who make a lot of money pay, and it is nothing. capital gains means you only get taxed at 15%, so you do not pay social security, medicaid, medicare. if you want to balance the budget in this country and get things right, you eliminate capital gains and tax everybody at the same rate. why should a wealthy guy, like
the previous guy running for him the previous guy running for president, who made $44 million be taxed at 14%? a secretary is paying 37% in taxes. you talk about tax cuts to corporations and to the wealthy. they say they got 10,000 pages of tax law. there are only probably 500 pages that apply to the typical worker. the other pages are just loopholes put in by congress every time they get a chance for these corporations, like ge, who made $40 billion and paid no taxes. i mean, come on. the fiscal soundness of this country is going down the tubes because we have this partisan crap on the republican side. host: a couple issues there. where do you want to start? guest: gosh, to respond to the
question as a whole, tax reform is going to be very complicated for a number of reasons. as mike said earlier, this is something republicans have been wanting to do for decades, and it has not been accomplished for many reasons but primarily because it is such a massive task to take on. and for this administration to want to turn next to tax reform, i think this goes back to what we have been saying, that if they had trouble with health care reform, tax reform is going to be a whole another beast that they need to tackle, certainly something that democrats are unlikely to cooperate with republicans on. host: mike lillis, the call started with concerns about more spending for the military. remind us about the upcoming budget deadline and the debt ceiling deadline that you referenced earlier.
guest: we have seen trump's budget. we have not seen the congressional budget just yet. they say that is going to come. this is not a bill that has to go into law. last year, they never passed a budget at all. we will see what they do. they obviously want to pass reconciliation so it makes it easier for them to do things in the senate on tax reform and health care and things like that. we're still in a continuing resolution period, meaning of the end of last year the past a short-term spending bill and then kicked it into this year, kicked it to the end of april, april 28, i think it's a there is a firm deadline there. what they do, we do not know yet. are they able to come together and has an appropriations bill? -- has an appropriations bill are they going to do it in tiny , chunks or do one big appropriations bill? or if the can't come together to do that, they could kick it down the road once more.
another cr, another continuing resolution, through the end of the fiscal year, september 30. a couple different moving parts. we're not sure what happened there going to take. the debt ceiling, we have already hit the debt ceiling, technically. the treasury secretary has said that that has already been hit -- or is it coming up? guest: i think it has been hit. host: that is when they start using the extraordinary measure. guest: i cannot remember if it is the extraordinary measure. host: it is to buy some time. guest: there is a lot of wiggle room, and the treasury can manipulate things. so we do not anticipate that any time soon, but that will be a good one, covering the fiscal hawks. it has been an annual fight for them and a thorn in the side of republicans because of these freedom caucus guys.
and in the senate, the rand pauls and the mike lees of the world who do not think this should be done, to control deficit spending by hiking the debt ceiling. we are looking to the fall for that one. host: a call from virginia, line for independents. caller: i was calling to reference trump's influence and how he led the media around by the nose during the campaign and they even knew it. save for the republican party. -- same with the republican party. they have thrown their philosophies out of the door. the latest example is nunes going to the white house and tattle tailing about what is going on in the committee. this kind of behavior is going to continue and not stop until the media on a unified daily basis called him out >> >> >> in harsher terms >> >> regularly.
you have an immature bully, and that is the only way to stop him. host: any thoughts? guest: i do think that the media is going to have an important role to play, as they always have but perhaps even more so with this administration because the president does have the tendency to make statements that are later disproven. so there is a tremendous amount that the media reporters will have to do to hold this administration accountable and also to hold lawmakers from both parties accountable on capitol hill. i think that is important going forward. host: a call from texas, republican. caller: good morning. thank you, mike and gabby, for what you do. you are very important. can you hold on for one second, please? host: we will put you on hold and come back to you when you are ready. a call from north carolina, a democrat.
good morning. caller: top of the morning to you, c-span. love the panel and the conversation. when the aca deal was passed, how many insurance companies were on the board? and when did the insurance companies begin to leave the aca? and did the republicans have anything to do with that, something like throwing a monkeywrench in it like having a clause that the insurance company can bailout thinking that the aca will be repealed? and why do paul ryan, donald trump, and mitch, all of them want to get rid of obamacare versus just treating the parts squeaking -- treating the
parts they see causing problems to some americans at this point? i do not understand why they would get rid of something that is helping people versus taking something away that will harm a lot of people. host: we got your point. guest: thanks for the questions. to your first point, there is no board that passed the bill. it was congress and the president who passed the bill. they were consulted and talked to many people, dozens and dozens of hearings, and the insurance industry would have testified. they certainly weighed in, and they certainly have deep pockets and make a lot of campaign contributions that are not insignificant in terms of how public policy is formulated. at the end of the day, it is the lawmakers who vote, not the insurance companies. the democrats who were moving this bill, including president
obama, they wanted single-payer, medicare for all. if they were king for a day, the insurance companies would have been cut out of the deal altogether. there are a lot of moderate democrats, and at that time they had a ton of blue dogs in the house and a lot of moderates from purple states in the senate, and they could not pass that liberal agenda that they would have done if they had the choice. no, there is no board, no insurance company board, that made the decisions. it was a compromise, as all legislation is. the result is what we have. also, it needs to be improved, and that is an acknowledgment of even president obama and the democrats. to your second question, why don't the republicans want to tweak it instead of repealing
it? a lot of that goes back to 2010. since this law was passed they , told voters we will repeal it, cut it out, there is nothing good about this. it is an ideological difference of the parties have that they will not overcome any time soon. democrats think the federal government should play a significant role in how the health care sector functions, and the republicans think the federal government screwed things up and should get out of the way. that is why they want to repeal it. that being said, the bill the just failed on the floor, it did not repeal all of obamacare. i think somebody said a 1000 page bill and 800 pages were left intact. there were a lot of insurance regs and benefits that were still there, which is why a lot of conservatives knocked it down, because it did not repeal enough obamacare. so maybe they cannot do repeal in one fell swoop.
the conservatives want to repeal the whole thing and start over. we will see what happens. host: we have a call from florida, line for republicans. caller: good morning. i watch you every morning. thank you. my comment is that the democrats do not want to pass anything that trump did. i used to be democratic, but then i turned republican. it is not trump. trump is doing really good. i do not know what kind of news these people talk about that it is trump's fault on everything. look at obama. he was spending money for the
enemy. he did not care about us. and the insurance, they are not making any money. host: got your point. guest: thanks for your question. i think there are some areas where the president will work with democrats going forward, and he has already shown that he is willing to do it if you look at trade, for instance, this is an area where bernie sanders am -- one of the most liberal members of the senate, agrees with president trump in certain areas. when we tackle trade, said is an area where you might see some bipartisanship. on immigration, there are a number of programs that this president and administration has signaled they may be willing to gradually phase out or preserve for some time, which is something that democrats are certainly advocating.
going forward, i think we are going to see areas where the democrats may be less inclined to criticize president trump. host: you can see more of gabby morrongiello's work on washingtonexaminer.com. mike lillis, thehill.com. next, the weekly your money segment. announcer: c-span's washington journal, live every day with the news and policy issues that impact you. tuesday morning, economist kyle will preview the upcoming congressional debate on tax reform and examine democratic, republican and bipartisan proposals. the north carolina congressman and north carolina congressman join us to discuss a bill they cosponsored calling for complete withdrawal of u.s. troops from afghanistan. watch c-span's washington journal live at 7 a.m. eastern
tuesday morning. join the discussion. up next, a conversation about on linux dream is a. then u.s. ambassador nikki haley and house speaker paul ryan address the u.s. israel policy conference. a senate panel will look into how sexual assaults against young athlete are investigated. life tomorrow from the judiciary committee at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span three. you can also watch online at c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. later a house committee considers legislation that will provide the treasury secretary to provide president trump second -- financial information from 2006-2016. that is on c-span3.