tv Senator Mikulski on Supreme Court Vacancy CSPAN February 28, 2016 1:13pm-1:33pm EST
legislation and take across the finish line. a lot of it gets into things that they are also trying to a cop was back home. whether it is other bills they are trying to get through committee that they are having problems with. so, you know the skeletons, how far they will and won't go? rep. scalise you do get an idea of just remembers want to go and what they want to see to get them to go along with it. you announced he wanted to go for majority leader year. any thoughts on going for it is fall? when speaker mainer left, there was an opening for speaker. mccarthy was running for that. i was running for the majority leader spot. we had built along -- a large team. ultimately that did not open up and i'm glad paul ryan stepped up to be speaker. he is really enjoying the job, which he didn't expect you
would. but he is doing a really good job helping to guide us. probably one of the best ideas guys in terms of conservative policy in the country, not just in the house. you haven't endorsed in the presidential race, is that correct? do you plan on doing so? rep. scalise i do not plan on endorsing before march 5. i want the most conservative person to win. i came up in school when ronald reagan was president. i saw a conservative leader who could actually inspire people who did not consider themselves conservative but understood because of how he explained that why the policy was good for them. i want to see someone rise to that level. mr. house: you would be ok with donald trump? rep. scalise i would be ok with anyone who was on the stage last night. it's obviously not completely settled. the election on tuesday night could have a lot of say in
whether or not this is going to be competitive or be over, but regardless of whoever on the stage is the nominee, i think they were doing incredibly better job than hillary clinton and bernie -- or bernie sanders. who is more to the left, socialist, someone who won't even denounce socialism is bad policy and bad direction for this country. all right, soft walls are over. let's get right to the nuts and bolts. [laughter] what is going on with the largest republican majority in the house since 1928? what is going on with the budget? appropriations bills? i thought the words continuing resolution and omnibus were thrown out the door last fall, but they are back in the lexicon? we are in the middle of the process of meeting with members about where to go forward on a budget.
always the big visionary document, always a complicated document put together. we had a lot of complicated issues to work through. issues were what started off as the difference between the fiscal hawks and our defense hawks. to me, i am in both camps. member of our -- many of our members felt they were in both camps, but it took weeks and weeks of meetings and intense negotiations to finally come to a place where we got an agreement. look, the budget is a document where because of how we lay it out to get it back to balance, how to get the economy on track, repealing obamacare, we do a lot of policy. how you save medicare from bankruptcy? because of that you unfortunately don't get much democratic support. it's got to be something that attracts the vast majority of our republican congress. whether you know it or not, we have people who have differences of opinion within the republican
conference. it makes us strong and healthy without a large majority, but it means we really have to work hard to come to a true consensus where you can get more than 118 people to vote for that bill. mr. house: the differences you have so many members, why would it not be simpler to pass a budget? if only it were simple to get such consensus on these large issues. if you look at our conference, there are a lot of important conversations being had about how we actually achieve a balanced budget and get the economy moving again. those are all things that ultimately we will resolve area we have resolved them in the past year you it means you have really got to work with everybody to come together to lay out the policy. these are not just platitudes. we are writing legislation, riding a true path to get the economy moving again. this is clearly something that
this president doesn't believe in. he has never brought forward a budget that gets to balanced. he raises taxes. we don't. you have got a very big difference in ideology, but hopefully whoever is going to be running for president on both sides, depending on what we put out, we will see if they agree or disagree with it. what is their approach to getting the economy moving again? is there a chance that the house won't do a budget? always aise: there is chance, but if you look at the budgets be presented since it's been an majority, in the 10 year window that has been a big .riving price most of what we have come to in terms of agreements, and policy that gets you there, those are things that we would actually -- it's not like we disagree upon them, but everyone has a different idea of how to do it.
ultimately have to come together on one approach that everybody supports. mr. house: cutting the agreed-upon spending level last fall was a nonstarter in the senate, correct? ryan has saidaker it would probably hurt the proposal process. do you think that there will be 12 appropriations bills pass this year? rep. scalise: i would like to see those bills moved out of the house. the budget agreement came out at the end of last year, an agreement from harry reid that they would start to move bills. afortunately, the senate has 60 vote requirement. i think that at a minimum they should review and reconsider that constitutional responsibility. having 51 votes to move an appropriations bill to the president's desk or back to the house is something that they should go and revisit. in the meantime, it does still take 60.
looking at reconciliation, for example, a byproduct of a passive judgment, last year was the first time since 2002 that the house and senate agreed on a budget that gets to balanced. it was significant and shouldn't take that long between times when the house and senate agree on a budget that balances, but we did that and allowed for reconciliation to put a bill on the desk of president obama, taking away money from planned parenthood. of the appropriations bills that they should revisit, they should revisit the requirements for those. in the meantime, it still takes 60 and the agreement from last year was that they were not blocked those bills forward anymore. if you had to guess, if you were a betting man, you don't believe the house will do 12 bills this year, do you? it's unlikely that
they would get all 12 signed into law, but it would be likely we got a budget and the agreement was still in place. with democrats in the senate holding to their word, you might be able to get a few of those bills moving not just the house, but the senate and onto the presence desk and signed into law. maybe they make it, maybe a few other of the bills. no longer are you looking at one dollar trillion with september 30 unresolved. it's a much smaller number, meaning you've actually got some policy riders signed into law. the biggest thing with this administration is doing this through the regulatory side. we are fighting the president and beating him on a lot of regulations, but in the meantime many others, out of agencies like the epa and so many other federal agencies that are destroying jobs in this country and we want to be able to push back on that and the best way to do it is by attaching limitations on the president's executive power in those bills before they get to his desk.
mr. house: what would you say to the conspiratorial minded that you are dragging your feet on a budget so that so many members can get through the primaries without having to cast a vote? mr. house: this is the -- rep. scalise: we're probably at the earliest point in decades where they are starting the process. april is when most budgets come out of the house. we are looking at something in march, one month earlier than normal. we have actually ramped up the process of getting those discussions going and ultimately getting the committee to do their work. so, we are way ahead of the average schedule. mr. house: when should the alarm
really start to sound? not nearise: we are the point were things should break down. we have a lot of passionate discussions coming in. you are literally talking about how to get the country turnaround, both getting the balance and the economy moving, dealing with the insolvency of medicare. those are big, big passionate discussions. i don't see those discussions happening on the democratic side, unfortunately. they will criticize a lot of things in the budget. which is fine. i don't see a lot of alternatives. frankly, i think of the conversation is good to have across the country. the people want us to solve these problems. the fact that we are willing to write them down on paper, put them down, call it the budget and debated with the american people, they are hungry for those ideas. the fact that the american people are hungry for those ideas, is going to hurt them in the presidential elections. the scalise: -- mr. house:
other side has helped you to pass these bills in the past. is it likely that you will have to rely on the other side to pass something this year, do you think? rep. scalise: that will ultimately be up to our members. omnibuswant to avoid an at the end of this year, this is the best way to do it, to start with the budget process that really opens the door for your appropriations bills to move and have been moved to the house in the senate to the president's desk. if you do that, you don't have this looming deadline of the and of the year that results in an on the this or cr, which is far less than what you would want to have as an ideal. does not allow you to have policy limitations on the executive overreach. some like you are saying the looming sense of dread and pessimism over the process is too early? rep. scalise: way too early.
i'm not pessimistic. these are the conversations we ought to be having. we really care about the policy. the policy matters to the direction of the country. these kindshaving of passionate conversations within the republican conference and that's what we came here to do. we came here to go and fight for our ideals, but ultimately in a majority you have got to come together to get an agreement with at least 218 members on the best path forward. mr. house: now, are we on ryan time yet? kept saying that he inherited a mess given to him and that nothing is his fault, but would you consider us on ryan time now? is this is speakership, budget, and appropriations process? has made it: paul clear that this is the direction he wants the conference to go. to have regular order. two people around the country that doesn't mean a lot, other
than having a functioning legislative process. having a functioning legislative process means we will be members deciding these big decisions. it will not come from leadership. if you are waiting around for paul to say that this is where everyone will go, whether you like it or not, that's not why he ran for speaker. we are having a lot of meetings with a lot of the members of the different policy areas, setting task forces on health care policy and restoring the base article one powers that have been eroded over the decades. it's the members who are coming to these meetings -- it was one of those yesterday, dozens had good ideas on how to restore the balance of power in washington so that government works for people again, which it doesn't right now. he has really laid out the foundation for how it could function properly with all members involved. it's not top-down very few people in the leadership are making decisions.
it means that the members have to come up with these ideas. i always use that jack kemp example. ronald reagan ran on tax reform. he actually had a bold agenda on tax reform. but it was not his idea. when he was fighting through the primaries, he wanted to lower tax rates, but for years jack kemp put together a year to lower tax rates. they were at 70%. ultimately after a few years of working he came up with the kemp law plan that lowered rates from 70 to 50. when ronald reagan got the nomination he said -- i want a low rate and i like the plan by jack can't. he actually adopts the plan to become his own and one year later it got signed into law. look, if you have got a good idea, if you have got a passion and a way to get the country moving again, start building the coalition now. if you watched the debate last
night they are talking about -- who built the trump tower and who is lying. it's not a detailed policy discussion, but we need detailed policy to get the country moving again. , it's to lay out a bold agenda so that when we have a nominee they can look at these good ideas that the house has been building coalitions around and say -- that's the way i want to save medicare, to get the budget balanced, to get the economy moving again. you understand that when a member of congress talks about task forces within congress, when there is a committee system, you begin to wonder if there is too much going on there that doesn't need to be done. if they have committees, why are they doing this kind of thing? i thought that the mantra was regular order.
the scalise: when he put committee of chairman jurisdiction in charge of those -- as i do think you can historically go back in congress to go around the chairman, you undermine the expertise. have a committee chair by jurisdiction, as you look at the password they set up to go up with a replacement for obamacare , we have over 60 votes to go. i think it is important to show with education work, those chairman are actually heading up the task force. their committees were actually going to do the work to produce the bills that come together. that's what he's done, he's
gotten the chairman to these. if you have a great idea on tax reform, whether it is fair, flat, lower rates overall and you can bring your ideas. that will result in better legislation for us. dinner at the same place you did last night. talking to a republican, a moderate, a fiscal conservative. he says i understand this. why don't we just passed those bills that we think we need to pass? who cares of the senate doesn't take them up? who cares if obama vetoes them? what is the house passed a replacement bill? ay doesn't the house passed a
military reform bill? a "bold agenda manifesto." why not do bills and let's run of his bills? = you will see a spring a lot of this bill to the floor . this year. i can't get you how many ultimately, but that is what the numbers are deciding right now. our members represent 750,000 people each on average. they are getting a lot of good ideas. at the end of the day the policy is what matters. you can't throw a bill on the floor and say let's with some bill appoints -- bullet points in a press release and put it out there. you need to work the details of the policy. at the end of the day i want these bills to be bills and get signed into law. barack obama will not sign a welcome -- a-- a
welfare reform bill. the next president can sign it into law. the presidential candidates candidate that bill. it is put together in a way where you can stand on its own merits and let's have both sides debate the issue. let the country engage in this. >> is the second year of a republican-controlled congress. why hasn't that been done already? this unity over the previous speaker and mishandling of matters swelling the process down? this is the year that everything 2017ing to be punted to because details of nubbin ironed out? how much of this stuff is actually taken flight yet? >> we have brought some of these ideas to the floor already last year.