fundraising data and campaign ads. watch c-span's 2024 campaignn o. online at c-span.org. or download as a podcast on c-span now, our free podcast. c-span. your unfiltered view of >> get project information from members of government right in the palm of your hand. when you preorder your cop yoif c-span's 2024 condition gretional directory with bio and contact information for every house and senate member of the 118th congress. important informationthe presid. federal agencies. and state governors. directory costs $32.95 plus shipping and handling and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. right

or go to c-span.org/shop to preorder today for delivery this spring. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we're funded by these television companies and more including charter communication. c be recognized as twhoiive best internet providers. we're just getting started. building 100,000 miles of new te who need it most. >> charter cmunications supports c-span as public service. along with these other television providers. giving you a front row seat to democracy. "washington journal" continues.. host: we are joined bycongress r jack fitzpatrick. there was a partial government shutdown that was avoided that

it only affected about half a dozen agencies. there is another government shutdown deadline coming up in ma what is the latest on those negotiations and will that be harder to pass? guest:lot more slowly. they've done half of their bills , six of the 12 appropriations bills but have not done the biggest ones which■ were the nes. the outstanding issues are the department of defense, the biggest nondefense bill which is labor, hhs and education and this year the toughest one to resolve is homeland security. you've heard plenty of arguments over immigration policy, border security that's played into the foreign aid debate. that makes it difficult to the department of homeland security so that's a difficult one. it includes state and foreign operations, funding the department of state at a time?+ when there is this debate over

ukraine aid, israel and palestine, hamas. that is not an easy one either. they've got a lot of money at stake and a lot of programs at stake and there are tougher issues left for next friday. host: leaving the toughest to the last on the is taking. what sort of pressure is speaker johnson under in his negotiations? is it looking like it's one of those bills that might get more democratic's of them republicans of work? guest: it certainly could. they got more democric support than republicans of work in the vote for the first six bills. those were supposed to be the easier ones. one of the pressure points for a speaker is if you can follow that has stirred rule and get a majority -- the hastertbecause e bipartisan, it has to have the presidhave support of the

democratic-controlled senate. you will not get 218 votes just from republicans. you need something bipartisan. it is tough for the speaker to envision any circumstance in des but if he can at least get a majority of his caucus to support it, that protects him to a pretty signint degree and he managed that for his first six bills. host: last week it wasj bill tht through line by line, looking for earmarks. into that major package there. how many air marks are we talking about? guest: this is 6628 earmarks. it's not that easy to go through each one. we did manage to get through six different pdf documents and we

work through it. it's $12.7 billion. . there are other bills coming so there will be more earmarks in those. what we saw the first six is a weighted toward house republican priorities because the house republicans band earmarks inbil. that's a big one for democratic priorities and it's now something that only the senate includes earmarks in. we will probably see a democratn the second tranche of bills, at leasdeatic earmarks of this as all the usual, a lot of money for police grants, local police department is the need radios. there is local infrastructure work on roads, work on water projects, sewer projects, a lot of local needs t■hat membershose

egregiouss, how does one get an earmark into a bill that's not negotiated in committee but negotiated behind closed doors in the leadership comes up with these? how to individual members get their individual earmarks into this it's more official now. there has been some controversy they submit formal request now for these local projects. not something that supposed to be done behind closed doors. it goes through a committee markup. there was a controversy in house republicans seeking to pull democratic earmarks when they tried to pull three projects for lgbt community centers and other issues.

this one at the very end was largely earmarks that were put through the committee process in a very official capacity but to pull behind closed doors. one was in lgb to sent her an in pennsylvania and another in nevada that work with victims of sex trafficking and sex worker advocacy those were evidently too controversial we e seeing some backroom negotiations but front, members post on their websites come here miry wesson here are the disclosures saying i am not financially invested in the organization so it can go to local governments or non-often but not for profit companies. there are major improvements compared to the old days back before it was dan for a while after the tea party wave of 2011. host: what are some of the

controversial ones from that list? guest:■! i think the most controversial ones other than the two that would be pulled over controversial among republicans, republicans ithe house also band museum earmarks. senators did not. there was some frustration last year over things that conservatives seemed not serious about. i think you will see a big push from conservatives in this next tranche of thos■)e because it includes education grants and a number of those go to museums. there has been a bit of an ongoing able to do grants for museums. this last one was over the figh that were the most controversial over a couple of issues and lgbtq issues and sex worker advocacy. host: what are some of the

museum grants? guest:onservatives among house republicans have said they want the federal nexis to put a number of things in house republican appropriations bills that are against dei policies. there is difference in the house and senate approach regarding museums for black history. when i went through all of the ks included in the house and senate appropriations bills come if you look for phrases among senate bills that say african-american or black history, minority cultural issues, those were the big difference thatared in the senate appropriations bills controlled by democrats and not in the house appropriations bills were conservatives have pushed for things like bridges, roads, military construction, that kind of think.

host: jack fix patrick is our ■;thisournal. another busy week in washington. the senate comes in at 3 p.m. if you want to join in the conversation, talk about earmarks, you can call now and the numbers tou/ joining is democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001 independen (we talked about in s segment special counsel robert herr will be on capitol hill to testify before the house judiciary committee on his report on joe biden handling hearings you will be focusing on ? guest: the president's budget proposal is supposed to be sent to congress for the next fiscal year.

they are still negotiating the fiscal 2024 bills. host so we get a peek at 2025. guest: yes and the president wish list and his broad vision for the next year. committee will hear from the omb director. that will be partly a big fight over the direction of the deficit because it always is among republicans and democrats on big issues like that following the president's budg proposal. it's also a long series of requests for agencies from what kind of funding they need going into next year. we don't know exactly within the budget yet but there often are specific lessons about why this program that i like upper a cut tomorrow's hearing in the senate budget committee with the budget director for the white house will be an■,ntnehost: anything e

watching for this week? guest: we had super tuesday last --. guest: i would like for it to be slower and the next awning deadline is next friday night. we put out the bills they are trying to negotiate we've heard a number of issues are wrapped up aside from congressional hearings this week. there may be some back and forth for action on whether we see the bills or figure out what issues are holding them up. i that will take up a lot of oxygen on capitol hill as they get closer to the end of next week deadline to avoid a shutdown. host: let's take some calls. this is dave in new york, independent, good morning. caller: good morning. i was glad to hear your guest talk about the hasrtert rule.

it's not an official and it allows a house like 100 people to blockade bill if the speaker invokes that. that's why we didn't get an immigration bill 10 years ago because speaker boehner said it doesn't have significant republic support even though it would've pasd house and it would've passed the senate and you would have gotten the same thing now. it's a terrible rule. do you have anything more you can say about the hastert rule? guest: the hastert might be slightly less relevant right now. there are plenty of complaints of bout it because you are correct in saying it's a relatively small number of house members host: a majority of the majority doesn't need to put a build the r? but the majority of the majority is the more than 100 members out of 435 members in

the house. it's a fairly small minority that could block legislation. if you been paying close attention lately, you've noticed there is a lot of discussion about a motion to vacate and the ability to threaten the status of the speaker of the house and potentially kick him out. one of the numbers that really could affect legislation is it only takes one member to require a vote on thmoalso, republicans ie can only afford to lose two votes before they lose a functi on one hand, you can abide by the pastor a funding bill with democrats but if you have a very vocal minority, even smaller than the hazard rule more than 100, things can be affected or blocked.

it could be affected significantly. we don't know exactly right now if there were a vote right now just on standalone ukraine aid, how many votes among house get. that's up in the air. there is a significant amount of pressure on the speaker of the house from the house freedom caucus and what's likely to be a few dozen members were much more vocal. on one hand, the hester rule hhn legislating and what can be brought up in the house over the years but this congress we had seen an even more vocal people and that threat of going after the speaker that has a significant impact. host: what has that more focal group then the freedom caucus? what have they said about what it would take for them to have a motion to vacate? guest: there have been some red

lines. marjorie taylor green bronson issues up regarding ukraine funding. at this point, as we come toward the next funding deadline, there hasn't been a massive push toward it lately. is something that uld come up randomly. there were some red lines drawn around ukraine aid. there is a lot of pressure on immigration measures. we have not heard an explicit redline drawn but there was a lot of anger among the most conservative members abouthat on measure that was supposed to be packaged with ukraine and israel aid. those arsof the members walking toward that line. because it only takes one member to bring it up, it's a bit unclear. host:■2 in maryland, this is ed, democrat, good morning. caller: yes, good morning.

i have a couple of questions on earmarks. i know your marks were banned at one time soback your marks? question number two, which party spends more money on earmarks? do the democrats spend more money or is it the republicans? guest:■c■) the ban on earmarks started in 2011 and lasted about a decade. it was pushed by republicans especially after the tea party wave in the 2010 election. the push to bring earmarks back, there was definitely bipartisan interest but the first steps were by democrats

won in the 2018 election come you started hearing discussions about it and after the 2020 election, there were steps taken to bring them back. they probably would not have done that if there is not a significant amount of interest from republican legislators who wanted to include in the first , you saw a significant number of your marks proposed bywhen it c, they had tried to keep it pretty close but it depends who has the majority. there was a fight this last summer when democrats have the house majority, they set up about split between where the money goes to the majority gets more money but it's not 90/10. republicans have abided by that level despite them submitting fewer requests than democrats. right now in the house, you see

more earmark funding by reblicans because they took the majority in the senate area it an advantage for democrats. i'm not sure how it will break down but it should be pretty close. the first couple of years, it was more money by democrats who bers. host: get into the earmarks in your story. ]■tthere were dozens of memberso voted against that bill but earmarks in the bill that passed that they voted against. guest: 42 members voted against it but had earmarks in it. 40 of them were republicans, more on the conservative side, some in more competitive dists, to democrats. this is evidence that shows earmarks can get members involved in the legislative

stake but it's not some handshake deal that means you vote for this bill and that means you get money. it may grease it's not as direcn exchange. host: so is it a y r them to have it both ways? guest: yes, we've seen that the past couple of years especially members of noted against the infrastructure bill but have some benefits coming back to their district area we will likely see some n cuttings for e funding coming back to these districts. it's more on the republican side. remembers onhe their and some hs significant amounts. randy weber in texas was one of the tar desktop recipients. matt gaetz who once called earmarks a corrupt practice got

a $50 million project in his district. you may see some critiques from democrats and what they see as an a progress there but there definitely is some reason to believe that members who even vote against bill may tout the money they are bringing back to their district ar. host: the phone lines are as usual. independent in queens, good morning. caller: good morning. i call your station once every six or seven months. let me make three quick points and i wi go ahead, we are runnig short on time. do you remr when donald trump said trust cia and the

russians? [indiscernible] two [indiscernible] donald trump of said file for bankruptcy during the first recession. joe biden and barack help the american people. they say whether the democrats doing for this country. the democrats saved america from two recessions. host: what's the third point? caller: i look around this countrys being built. republicans want to tell their constituents that we brought it

to yl,ou. joe biden brought the restoration projects in all these changes. more than 200,000 jobs in this economy. he's produced more jobs than donald trump ever did. even more than barack obama did. [indiscernible] host: we got your point. waything you wanted to follow up with? guest: you will probably hear a lot of that in the budget hearings on the president's budget. every time we go to these hearings regarding the president budget, it gets into the very recent trend the last couple of decades of democrats coming in under tough economic circumstances. you hear about that debate ov ie

beginning of a democratic administration. bobby scott in the house says there's supposed to be a house budget committee hearing on these issues next week. that goes to a lot of the arguments the democrats have made for these budget proposals. host: we will be covering the senate budget committee wher hay morning, tomorrow at 10:15 a.m. eastern on c-span.org and the ee cpan now video half. the omb director will be before senators at that hearing. this ish carolina. caller: i would love to see congress change the appointment of judgeships and have that be done by somebody else. this seems to take up a lot of

their time. host: you mean the confirmation process? caller: yeah,te on four or 500 s area it see to ta up an awful lot of their time and they should be spending i on passing valuable legislation. and they make sure the people who are elected are all aight. don't let these phony baloney people come in, don't have this have them qualified for the job they are supposed to be doing. host: mitch mcconnell is stepping away from his leadership position in one of his legacies will be from his time when he was majority leader and his push for federal judge confirmations, move that is seen as influencing the judiciary for generations or decades. guest: some of these are such

long positions. the supreme court is a long lasting legacy ofru mate -- of mitch mcconnell in his role when he was senate majority leader area it's the impact he had on the judiciary. it does take up a lot of floor m judges. granted, the senate floor often goes long stretches where they don't have major must pass legislation they need to be moving and a lot of these negotiations happen especially of his bicameral negotiations when they're up against a funding deadline, those happen off the floor and outside committees it was possible to get their work done even if a lot of the floor time is taken confirmations. it is something that dominates a lot of their attention. if you watch the senate floor

it doesn't necessarily stop them from doing other legislation but it is a big issue for the senate area host: viewers can watch the house floor on thursday evening. guest: at this point, not that i know of area you probably sawsur head. it is technically something they are supposed to in force. that's a rule that usually applied more toward the normal functioning of the house when their casting both it would not be unusual someone were wearing a hat during the house vote for a staff member to ask someone to take it up. this was an unusual circumstance so we haven't heard of any steps that leadership is taking in response to that area it was an unprecedented situation and am not sure there is any to compare

it to. host: i saw a quote from a congressperson who is known for her hats. she does not wear them on the house floor but shees tooker --. guest: she was pushing the envelope so there are members whenmits. when there was a house floor sit in on gun control issues. they were livestreaming from the house floor which was against the rules of the floor because of the significant disruption. host:■y we aired some of the livestream from the house floor. guest: not that house leadership was happy about that. it was not ignored to the extent that marjorie taylor greene at has so far been ignored although that also was seemingly supposed

to be a bit of a civil disobedience kind of obstruction of the house to get their message out. if members start wearing hats they are not -- and there is not some sort of repercussion or no and as■éked them to remove it, i wonder about members who are known for their hats. members keep an exactly the deee house floors are strictly enforced. host: isn'there of ban on the house floor? i've seen members with their phones out. guest: that is an example to my knowledge of a rule that's not enforced very much in the context of the state of the union. they are typically not suppose to be taking pictures in the house floor. to my knowledge, i don't know of any case in which they specic on the state of

the union. i believe that is an instance where they don't enforce that rule. host: let me get one more call in, james in atlanta, line for democrats. caller: i have two issues. why is biden letting israel get between him and the american people. would biden isdisenfranchising . it's not only palestinians but a lot of black muslims and people who sympathize with is■/rawhy dh power over biden? why is it note democrat can file a simple amendment on the floor? they vote against theseills likeí the infrastructure bills

and no funding will go to your district. that will stop them from doing what they are doing. if you vote against the or any bills that require funding, none will go to your district and the people who vote for it [indiscernible] we'll let them live on their guns and eat their guns. guest: the first question on israel, clearly there is pressure on president biden to try to get israel to take a different tack toward hamas and gaza. he has r verbally and set it times the things netanyahu is going overboard he has not changed his funding request to send aid to israel. it's becoming a bit of an issue in those discussions even though there is a piece of■8, legislatn that the senate voted on.

they are not near enactment of that because the foreign agent package was held up in the house. it's a tough issue in which there is a lot of pressure on the president and he is not changed his stance on the legislation though he has changed some of his rhetoric. that's about as much of an answer is i can provide. that's something ondemocrats hae vote no but take the dough issue on these e■amarks. that is the slogan from democrats to criticize the members. i point out of bringing back the earmark funds is to broaden the involvement of members who might otherwisee process for must pass legislation. if you give someone like matt gaetz or some hard-line conservative dream august

numbers -- members who really vote for appropriations bills, an opportunity to get something in there, you will proba get a g no even if they have money in there but it may have an act. it doesn't in mean they will both for it but i think the idea these projects is you give people some skin in the game. we can't predict if it would have been a different note favod money in there for the general idea of this is even at people end up voting no against the bill itself, they are trying to it more members an opportunity to somehow involve in the bill and that may have some positive effect. host: are there some members who don't want earmarks, did you find someone who did? guest: i have not found any who said they would not recently but then did.

a few years ago, he called a corrupt practice and recently started adding involved. host: who are the ones going to the floor and calling out their? people like chip roy. to vote like mike lee has been on a tear against earmarks, rand paul. they continue to not be involved. you seen some movement and's some is not necessarily the met gaetz type it initiallygranger,n the house appropriations committee said i'm not going to submit request but has changed her stance and submitted some smaller earmark read west. you don't see all the members of leadership like from senator mcconnell. rowing number of people submitting written west even among the conservative wing but there are still some very anti-earmark members. host: