held is to talk about for just a minute who he is: a fighter. no person has fought harder for workers and for their families than harry reid. no senator, no person that i know in public life has made that such a central part of who they are and a central part of their priorities. and also at the same time a fighter for those who often don't have a voice here, people who don't have power ever in their lives or often don't have power on a regular basis. they always had a friend in harry reid, someone who would go to the end of the earth fighting on behalf of them. over and over again in our caucus, he would say, we have to work on this issue or we have to get this or that done for people out there that are hurting. and there are so many different examples of that that we don't have time to enumerate them

today. but i'm recalling today a great line from a great democratic leader, william jennings brian who talked about the power of one individual to make a difference and the power of an issue or a set of issues to drive that person's success in public life or even beyond public life as citizens. william jennings brian once said the humlest citizen in all the land when clad in the armor of a righteous cause is strongest than all the hosts of error, unquotes. so said william jennings brian about what citizen clad in the armor of a righteous cause. now, harry reid was a united states senator and he's been a leader. but he's also a very humble man at his core. and his righteous cause wasn't just one issue but if you had to encapsulate it or summarize it,

the righteous cause for harry reid was fighting on behalf of those workers, fighting on behalf of those people who did not and ever have power in their lives. and his ability to not just articulate their concerns and their struggles and literally their hopes and their dreams was one of the reasons why so many of us have such a high regard for him. we of course commend and salute his service. we appreciate his commitment to strong values, but we especially appreciate his steadfast support for those who needed his voice, who needed his work, who needed his votes and needed his leadership. so to senator reid we say thank you for your service. thank you for what you did for your home state of nevada. and thank you for what you did for the united states of america. with that, mr. president, i would yield the floor. and note the absence of a

quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. mr. casey: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: i would ask consent to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the inate stands in rees the mountain and pacific time zones. joining us on the phone right now to discuss action in the senate when it takes a look at medical issues, alex rogers with national journal, a staff correspondent. we are having you want to talk

about something called the 21st century cures act. what is not and how would you explain it to people? guest: the 21st century cures act is a major health care reform piece of legislation that funds a number of top priorities for the obama administration, providing 4.8 billion dollars. , the canceritiative somehot, and it provides reforms of the fda expediting the development of new medical treatments and streamline the approval process, trying to bring some medicines to the market more quickly. host: what is the price tag for this legislation? guest: $6.3 billion total overall. democrats really like it and it brings regulatory reforms that republican support.

talking about a three-year process, and the house passed it overwhelmingly and the senate is looking to consider and pass it within the next 24 hours. host: talk about the drug companies, what is their response? do they benefit? companiesrmaceutical are broadly in favor of it, and some advocacy groups like publicist and who oppose it -- public citizen who oppose it. they would say it you roads the standards of the fda. lobbyists hundreds of have been working on this bill for years trying to get it passed. just because of how they are including some things for democrats, when billion dollars for opioid funding, they have variety ofo marry a different issues to get this across on the lame-duck. host: on the senate floor

yesterday when this was being considered, talk about what was going on. guest: vice president joe biden came yesterday. he is the presiding officer and chair. the vice president w the vice president of course was also a senator for her to ask tears and talk to reporters who followed this felt like home to him. m senator mitch mcconnell, majority leader brought up a measure to rename parts of the 21st century act for the vice president's son, beau died of brain cancer last year. as he was considering a run for president, he was clearly grieving over the loss of hisnal son and was also extremely emotional yesterday the presiding officers chair and saw the senators clark and cheered

as they renamed aspects of his bill for his son. >> the senate consider in this 21st century cures act and alex rogers of national journal talks to us about it. one more quick question about harry reid and the senate this week. >> guest: that's right. the democratic leader will have his last floor speech tomorrow and around thursday evening there will be a number of different speeches and senate majority leader mitch mcconnell is big and is expected to speak and also vice president titan. >> thanks for your time this morning. >> guest: thanks for your time. appreciate it.

[inaudible conversations] good morning, how are you?

everything fine? we've got some great people coming in today. you'll see him. >> talk about mayor bowser from washington d.c. today. >> a lot of things to a lot of people. a great group of people doing very well. >> kids in the contract the air force one. >> the plane is out of control. over $4 billion for air force one program. i think it's ridiculous. the win is doing a little bit of a number. we want boeing to make a lot of money, but not that much money. okay, thank you. [inaudible conversations] >> mr. speaker, i just got a call from a reporter about a

tweaked which the president elect has made canceling the contract with boeing co. and the federal government to build air force one. the last time i looked, and i think the president of the united state is still barack o obama. he will be president of this country until the 20th of january. what we have right now is the president elect running around the world with his tweet bar making statements that are disruptive and therefore the american public. he calls taiwan and raises questions about her relationshia with china as though she were the secretary of state. but he has not even found anyone to do that job.

he should be in the transitionma office, figuring out how he makes a smooth transition of the american government from the efficiently run government of mr. obama to his administration, not making the decisions himself and going out and announce team through his tweet at 3:00 in the morning because he can't sleep this kind of operation is the operation of somebody who's used to running a big business. when his president of trump casino or trump towers, he cannot like that. he can come in and they do this, do that. i don't know if he understands,s mr. speaker, that you in the house of representatives are the ones who made the contract and appropriated the money for that plane. that is the process.

that the democratic process of this country.in it's not done by the president getting up in the morning and tweaking of 147 characters in and in a contract with hundreds of jobs at the people in my district. good hard-working americans. you go down to indianapolis, indiana and walk around and sayt i saved a thousand jobs. we still haven't seen the contract. we don't know what the deal is, how long the jobs have to last. we don't know anything. we just know that a tweet went out that we have in many ways a big rally down there and did a victory lap, but there is no piece of paper. the people in indianapolis if i were to make a recommendation to ban, mr. speaker, would the talk

native americans about the treaties that have made the united states of america and how good they are and how hard you have to fight to make those treaties work. he made a treaty or on trade treaty with carrier. my assistant, mr. vice president, mr. pence will get $7 million from indiana to the carrier and then, maybe there will be -- no one knows what is going on. but the president elect should spend his time in the transition office deciding who is going to hold the job that will make this country run. this is not going to be run by one man in the white house, making pronouncements and thinking that all the world is going to throw themselves down on the ground and worshiped him.

we have a democratic process. the burden on the house of representatives, in some ways i am sorry to be leaving because i think it is going to be a very tough session and help in the new president understand how a democracy actually works. it's not a big business. it is a business of the people. the 435 members of this house take the money that comes in and taxes and appropriate them out as they see fit for the country. the president doesn't do that. when the congress is done, they passed the bill to him and he spends the money as the congress has decided it should be spent. when you look at the constitution, perhaps the new president-elect has looked atl the constitution.

the first article is the congress. we are the preeminent body in this government because we are elected by the people.e >> the gentleman's time is expired. >> and we have the power. stop tweeting, mr. president-elect. >> back from the house floor this morning. president-elect trump will be in fayetteville, north carolina later today as he continues his victory tour to the state effort from democratic four years ago to voting for him. the rally starts at 7:00 p.m. eastern.

>> financial reporters on prospects for change in the financial services industry with the incoming trump administration and who some of the key players might in the cabinet and congress. >> if everybody could put their knives and forks down or at least quiet them, i think we are going to get started. that was really good. thank you. so, welcome back to the clearinghouse annual conference and welcome to lunch. so, for lunch we are going to do a little something different. they will be illustrated discussion of regulatory policy and capital ratios and things like that. instead we thought it would be instructive and having spoken to them, quite a lot of fun to hear from the media their perception of the environment for your institutions and even more broadly of course with recent events that politics the topics

get even more interesting. as you know i'm capable of long introductions, but i will not do them here because you know these people. i wake up every morning with ben white. like many of you, loaning money is my first reappeared i spend all day with steve reason then because he pops up periodically and i turn the volume back up. i think with ben mcclanahan from the "financial times," they actually don't pop into my office in the morning. i read them or it might be sure, but certainly always had great detail. they are true resources when it comes to these issues and obviously a big read for a lot of for a lot of you in this audience. probably less known she would be candy wolf is going to be our moderator from citigroup. she's had a global government affairs at citigroup which given the reach of citigroup is quite a job yet she always seems unruffled to me.

one reason is because she's had vast experience in the area in which she works issues previously worked in the senate, office of vice president and his assistant to the senate for legislative affairs in the bush administration, so she knows where she's geeks. you could not be in better hands with candy gave it back, let me turn it over to her to introduce the rest of the game. >> welcome to my panel. i usually have to be the one answering the questions from press so it's actually a pleasure to be appeared and mask all of these questions. i think we will start a little bit with politics and set the stage for the environment and then we will move there to some of the policy issues as we go along. i was going to start open to all of you after the doc on election night and the numbers are coming back and i'll decided dates that were supposed to be in play were

now in play and pennsylvania was moving in the direction of trump and michigan and ohio in all those states. what was kind of going through your mind as the election was unfolding and perhaps we can talk a little bit to not only focus on your mind, but what were you thinking with respect to our industry, financial services, if anything i see watch the results come forward. i will open a brother to the conversation and we will keep working around. >> what was i thinking us returns are coming in? my first thought it might read that we got this one wrong. [laughter] slight possibility that i didn't call it right. there was that initial send a while, this is remarkable. i clearly missed the extent to which tribe's message would resonate in the rest about and

clinton was not getting the number she needed in the obama coalition as we are not getting particularly some of the suburban female white voters that i thought would turn out in big enough numbers and trump ran a score in a lot of places where obama had won in 08 and 12. the nature of the elect are it and the way it moved surprise to me and it surprised a lot of people who trusted the poll. when you look at the margin, we are not that far off if she winds up with 1% or 2% win in the popular vote that might be slightly below where she was. a lot of the state surveys, michigan, wisconsin were subtle point and so it was surprising to me. i wouldn't say i was spending a lot of time at that moment thinking about whether it be for the financial services industry that i started quickly thinking

about that in the days following and i'm sure other people again and today is the extent to which this is a complete seismic change in which there will be a massive deregulation and evisceration of dodd-frank or whether people are opposed to trump in favor of some of the staff jeb has certainly wants to do in the house that would include higher capital levels. they will be the tug-of-war between those who really want to completely gut dodd-frank and not go and raise capital levels significantly. i just don't think we have an answer to that. shock, awe, surprised all those things went through my mind and then i thought about the cobra of columns don't have to write and got very depressed. >> van, were you one -- no, you would not bet on the conference call. as a conference call than i'm probably not supposed to talk about, but i will anyway, early in the meeting with nbc and i remember trying to listen to

him, the person who was talking. it was very early on in the evening that i realized something was not about to happen the way it was expected to happen. i can't quite describe to you what he said except that it reminds me of that guy from the rocketry company and apollo 13 who cap saying it's not supposed to do this. it's not designed for this. give me an answer. it's not designed for this. something is weird here. and then the stuff starts coming in. here's a weird name, right? something like several thousand times the following conversation has to take place. exit poll or, do you think donald trump is trustworthy to be president? respondent: no. exit pollster: who did you vote for? donald trump. if you look at the exit polls,

that have been some enormous number of peopleoverall and seventh in like 30% or 40% of trump voters. i had the displeasure at this point of having conducted a national poll two weeks earlier. cnbc has done a poll every quarter now and showed hillary with a nine-point lead, which is a weird name. on one hand he hoped for a poll in line with everyone else. on the other hand he hoped for a poll that is busy. when i go back and think, could i have been smarter thinking about that poll? what i think about is the data that shows how dissatisfied people were with the political system, how dissatisfied they were with the economic system, how angry they were, how much concern there was about the economic future and said to myself, okay, there is no way they can put essentially the incumbent back in. i would have to have tilted in

my analysis again the top line. you can read the bottom line of this in the exit polls as well explaining what happened. >> then. >> very much set up on the evening we had a fridge to stop with, with which we did. a group of us trying to stay busy that evening. i went down to the pub at 7:00 and by then the script was intact at that point. i remember watching that climbing and climbing against the dollar. if you actually can see a movement inching up a movement inching up and up and at that point i realized we could be in for a bit of a shock in that point the pieces didn't get eaten. and i just tried to stay useful by hammering out something about

folks in japan, which were open at that point. they cranked up and got into action. >> there is a similar dynamic today at the election. we have put in a plan or half of us on the banking team would be very late, sort the market and the other half would come in early the next morning. i was on the late shift and early through the next day was sort of kind of joking with all the sentiment that will be able to come in at normal time if this is an uneventful election and everything goes as land, but obviously that didn't take place. an event site is scummy certified partner to looking at the political dynamic of it and wondering how everything was so surprising to so many pollsters. but also we were following the market and watching stock prices

with a very interesting reaction to the gathering is that it was going to be a trump when and then changing sort of around four, five, 6:00 a.m. after the accepted beach that he was going -- that they started to remount. we saw within an eight hour time frame the market's reaction go from very worried too optimistic about what it meant for u.s. stocks. >> i think some of that optimism comes from the fact that there is this there is this fear that there is dispute that all of a sudden you have a republican house and the question in the election was whether the republicans would maintain the senate. in history, if we look back, there's only been certain periods of time in which an administration is controlledby both parties, by the same party of gotten things done at least in the current timeline. so if you look to obama's first two years or bush made one, two,

three, four, five, six, and then of course now potentially for trump. >> one inning as the markets used to like gridlock and that wasn't the reaction. >> in this case -- >> i thought the market was really wrong about that. one of the private moments i had was to be excited for myself professionally in that half of my job was supposed to be covering the site and the economic data but also economic policy. there hasn't been economic policy for six years. you can laugh at that, but it's true. in fact, i was excited when the republicans won the congress and 14 because i thought that meant at least bills would go through congress and get on the president task. they may be somewhat instructive and not republican congress could barely put anything on the president does.

they want to talk about the further if they can put their act together. my feeling was professionally done okay i'll have economic policy to cover again and personally as an american, i wasn't sure that america was going to get by another four years with gridlock. this is a sad real quickly. i spent six years in russia at the early period of 1998 when you see a country with me for the just addition, you need that stuff. it just wasn't getting done for whatever reason. well, i think we can talk about what's going to be bad, but the fact that something can get done and some of that is reflect it in the market optimism. >> it is obviously, as trina levin pointed out, the markets turned around overnight partly because of the concession speech which was relatively gracious

and not filled with israel, but also became clear that there would be a republican senate, house, president bush we could get into detailed with what it means but the prospect for tax reform, lower individual tax rates, maybe some big fiscal stimulus spending all of which short-term is good news for the stock market. not necessarily about term good news that the spike up inflation and you've got a scenario where you have a stimulus for the economy doesn't appear to be a big stimulus with the debt and deficit again. this scenario quickly played itself out that this is a great short-term bull run move. >> baby will transition into policy a little bit. first, let's talk about the transition because an administration has to go through the transition team they are putting landing teams into the various agencies and assessing

regulation and, policies, creating some sort of briefing book that will be turned over to the heads of all of these agencies and new cabinet posts. one of the more important ones that would then hearing rumors about for some period of time as treasury. perhaps i could achieve on the spot and to when we might hear or who it might be an kind of talk about the rumors that have been swelling now for three plus weeks to >> just anecdotally about this. i have been hearing for days now and just in the process of having been in this room for her to minutes, i have heard that it's going to be announced tomorrow ensured kushner has vetoed him and he is not going to get it because he didn't raise enough money for trump and they're angry at him for not having raised enough money. do

.. continues to be the most likely candidate to get it. there's still others in the mix including jeb hensarling although i don't think, you know, it's hard to cover this transition because you've got so many different elements of the trump universe fighting each other. in terms of the transition teams, it's not, we were talking beforehand, i think it's true for a lot of people in the room,

this is not the universe of economic policy and financial policy people that a lot of you know very well. a guy like bill walton who is running treasury transition team, sort of big in the 80s, outlined capital and then the big fight with einhorn and kind of disappeared into the wilderness for many years and been living on a farm or whatever, investing in movies and now he's back and he's on his treasury landing team and is very anti-regulation, very anti-big government but we don't know a lot about him are what he is doing and what that's going to look like. it's very hard from the perspective to cover this transition and to think there are a lot of people involved in it that we just don't know very well. >> i think mnuchin as a perfect example. while he was at my face on the campaign, he has much less history with sort of coming out with regulation and economic policy than someone say like

john allison they are a bank in this faq institute and is very much on the record about what he thinks should happen. i think if trump does. mnuchin it's a wild card for how high he prioritizes his reform. >> from what i've been hearing, it's been in the news are longtime but why hasn't anything confirmed? wilbur ross seemed a shirt and his comments last week i spent most of my thanksgiving researching and writing a story about them. we heard monday was the confirmation day there it seems to be nothing is certain in this environment. athlete nothing to gain by keeping the likes of us inform informed. >> there's an element, there's some infighting, a lot of action for the big jobs, the three or four largest cabinet jobs but there's also an element i think that he wants to test the waters, right? if you're going to hire a treasury secretary, a job that important, even if it is mnuchin

to lose, you want to interview other candidates. >> for some of these treasury people there's always the question of getting through the paperwork, the betting, the assets, how he would, so we like mnuchin would go about putting it in a blind trust a liquefied assess and a willing easy to do that. of course, where the guy at the top not really inclined to do any of that so how do you demand of your cabinet secretaries? that's true for all of the big jobs but particularly trouper treasury when you are operating within the universe is a people of significant conflicts. i think it's more trump is not completely, i think he leans mnuchin and likes him and no zoom but there are people very close to trump or whispering in his year old pull the trigger

yet. there are conservative on a log's -- ideologues, on reform in the regular system and banking reform whereas you have more of a blank slate and a guy like steve. a lot of these moving parts we hear, either often this is coming tomorrow and then by the end of the day, stand down, it's not happening. >> nobody said romney for treasury secretary? >> i haven't heard that. >> to me this points to another issue which is, to borrow a craps term, which is a game i'm fond of, the extent to which the market is trading trump on the come here. in large measure, a campaign is a dress rehearsal and a blueprint and a skeleton for an administration. and part of the reason why i think ben says we've not seen anything like this before is

there's no campaign structure that moved from here to there. we had the famous quote when it fairly somebody went to the west wing and asked how many of these people stay? so he doesn't have to i don't think he is tremendous and behind where he normally would be. but i also think that the extent to which the president-elect was specific about plans and specific about what he wanted to do, it was unclear, he said i wish i people to do these things, remains unclear. i know the market is very optimistic and there's something about the optimism but i think it's way out over its skis on this in terms of what can be done and what it's capable of being done, given the infrastructure that he lacks. i know that morning that the times published its interview with donald trump, i had of his personal reaction of wtf, for lack of a better term, which is how am i supposed to do this job

if for the next several months the whole game is it then? right? if he doesn't visit data mining this for the economy. but the if, we don't know what the it is. the if could be i'm going to key parts of obamacare on going to get rid of obamacare. i'm going to keep this or -- entity it is so uncertain, it's very difficult to gain out to events. right now the market has decided what it is and what the been is. >> one more thing on the nature of this transition versus other transitions. in some way it's not that dissimilar from obama in '08 in the sense that senator obama then did not have a government in waiting. he was coming out of a single term in the senate that wasn't a massive world of policy people around him. so he's building a lot from scratch in the transition but they took it so seriously from

the start in terms of just hitting the mark. they also had a crisis they were coming into office to deal with, so the policy framework was how do we stop the bleeding? how do we do a stimulus package quickly? let's give people a place. with trump, no waiting, no big policy universe ready to turn the key in the white house and then start moving. and you have a relatively decent economy, decent gdp growth, good stock prices, good housing prices and a blank slate for what he can do. as he said we don't know what the it is. you have somebody who's policy views are not well known in addition to having the apparatus and structure to put in place for a new administration. the gap of unknowns is enormous. >> part of the continuation of that is where going to record a time trying to get cabinet officials. that's a wave one. you have to have the names in, get people through the confirmation process, hearings and things at the beginning part of january in order to get

individuals confirmed on january 20 and 21st so you have a cabinet with continuity of government. a day that the president this morning. but after that in the conversations going on next is what is wave two and three and for? i think if you look back and only some of the research i've done previously, administrations take at minimum through august to try to fill out a lot of these positions. you're going to cabinet officials going in to treasury with themselves, probably a secretary, and maybe a counselor. and then no one else underneath them in terms of assistant secretary, their undersecretaries, et cetera. i know part of the conversation is how long is ago today, kind of what the next set of names and positions that will be filled at one of the things i keep it is that wave number two, maybe it is three but we will put wave to come its around philly at treasury also starting to look at the fed, the fcc, the

ctc. some of the conversations occurring with the fellows we see because the artist a penny. the fcc will be a position of not having a quorum with the resignation and departure of the chairwoman. at some point some of these positions will have to accelerate or congress is going to decide here at the next week that they're going to confirm some of these folks to begin to fill out these positions. but given the discussion may buddha turned a bit to the fed. we know we have had two vacancies, and maintain the. they don't appear to be going anywhere right now and we've had the vice chair of supervision, while carrillo has been an acting role but he is not been officially appointed or confirmed, so there are some flags that can be filled. if treasury secretary gets named

and the trump transition begins to focus on, what impact do you think a new administration, whether transition or administration can have on the fed and what i think about how quickly this might happen or what it could mean for people here in the room around the policy going forward. >> thing i would say on that coming you mentioned to reload as the acting chairman, supervision, that is ever powerful regulator to have been there that want to be an acting title title. i think space to the fact that there's such partisan discord and inability to work together in washington that obama felt like you didn't get to really through or a nominee through. spin it forward, what would the democrats do? how willingly be to work with trump, how much would pushback, how much will they try to work with him? i think that's one of the big

wildcards on chuck schumer and leadership in trying to determine how tough they will make up for trump to fill those positions. >> i wonder how long carrillo will survive if he elects to quit and take position in academia next september. that means he has to rev up for six months which means -- i suspect there's a lot of people in the room, the consensus is they will not be sad to see the back of him a. [laughter] >> let's take a poll. >> the numbers are that he gets to point to immediately. if he names one of them as the vice chair of supervision and he gets -- he resigns. sorry, getting over a cold. and then he will have a chair and vice chair. he will have five of seven the next year and a half.

>> i agree with all of that. we have e-mails after some of the names were floated as head of supervision and all of them were like if this happens i would be surprised if he stays the week. that's the conventional wisdom. i have spoken to dance why don't know if that's true or not. does he stick around to try to stop somebody from undoing what he tried to do on capital levels and all that? i doubt it. he probably does head for the door. a lot of the game will be played at the fed in terms of regulation at all if you care about. because, and we can get into this in more detail, the idea that congress is just going to uniformly get rid of dodd-frank and change regulation overnight. it's just way more complicated than that, way harder than that. as aaron rightly said, it depends on democratic unanimity

in the senate and the ability to filibuster stop. it's not like elizabeth warren and for forces are completely without weapons, and also in arguing look at, trump campaign on a populist message of championing the little guy, not giving wall street what it wants and he will have to do without. >> what weapons does she have? >> she can't stop them but she does have the bully pulpit and she has the convening power to get the progressive left to a least make mac and get in the headlines with some of these regulatory changes would do. if republicans are lockstep in agreement on an agenda, on financial reform and changing aa lot of these things they could probably get it done and get it signed by trump. but there are going to be plenty who are nervous of that, is this really what republicans in pennsylvania, ohio, wisconsin voted for? how is this going to play for

these people? what does it mean for 2018 elections? all of the senate elections coming up. i don't think it's a slam dunk all of a sudden the pro-wall street reform people, i think they are in retreat. i think the odds are stacked against them but do think there still weapons they can use to try to slow some stuff down in the city. that's what it gets back to the fed and the appointments of their, the departure of carrillo would be where a lot of the action takes place. >> following up on steve boyd, the senate still has the filibuster. there is a question as to whether or not the senate would change the rules going forward to require only 51 votes for many of the positions -- of the provisions. you have to enact cloture and you need the 60 votes. at that point that's really the challenge that the republicans have i think about any of the reforms which is you have 52

republicans. if all were voting with you. assuming louisiana votes, does for the republican candidate but you end up with 52 senators. it's somewhere in there to get 60, you need eight democrats spent the elizabeth warren wants to filibuster any reform to dodd-frank? i don't know how it will happen. separate bills or a single build? >> no one knows the answer to that. >> she can't stop it unless some other get a democratic votes. >> or they try to move something on a bill that requires 51, which can do do with special rules in the senate, but do not get totally nerdy, you have to, okay so my background used to be budget in the u.s. senate so i will get nerdy. you need to do, to have a reconciliation, has to the budgetary impact and it is in the budget like we think budget. it's got to be scored by the cbo does it will have an impact.

there are very few provisions that i'm aware of that can get that scoring. but that's for others to think about whether there are certain provisions that could ultimately be considered. >> i don't want to be debbie downer here, but it's not trading like elizabeth warren has a filibuster authority over the reform of dodd-frank. am i crazy about that? >> i'm not -- >> it seems to me -- >> i'm highly skeptical all of this stuff will get undone. >> your stocks are fine and all good. >> away below. >> on the financial stocks and the s&p 500. >> we've all seen bank stocks can we've all read stories about, it seems to be to be almost nothing to do with the prospects of regulation under the new administration. my colleague is a huge fan of the charts, and he showed me

early on that the gap between the yield is almost a direct map, i do know what index, it's all prospects of normalization of policy. given all these uncertainties, all these personalities that may or may not do what job, i think it's in that -- >> dodd-frank reform is one of the reasons be yield is a. more inflation, the longer part of the bond yield curve spiking up and the short and probably coming with it at some point, that's all very positive for bank stocks. also just a change in activity, very good for trading desk. part of the banks that have been depressed for years in part because of regulation come in part because of market conditions and investor appetite is starting to see more robust activity. >> you are it's -- spin they've had a good rally.

it reset. i think regulation was part of that but not huge part of that. i think it's going to be definitely a tailwind for the stock but you are counting on regulation going away or the regulation or dodd-frank being rolled back as the thesis for a bank stock investment, it may be a longer play or a trickier point. >> we should take into account the extent to which the bank stock rally is overly rally from what the market expected which was a clinton white house with a democratic senate and a smaller republican house majority and the clinton administration that, she is widely viewed as pretty moderate on banking and have all the speeches and all the stuff but she had run populace to be to bernie sanders. she had to talk by getting tougher and cracking down on wall street. she probably would've put people in positions and a lot of these agencies and treasury, have strong pro-wall street background. you had other reset in

expectations for bank reform and regulation based on generally pro-business whitehouse said and house of representatives. so a lot of it was counterfactual like recover going to get this, we got back. >> aaron, back to you on the comment you made in terms of bank stock valuations are looking at infrastructure potentially, some type of package although no one really understands what that means. tax reform which we think is potentially corporate territorial, or international reform along with individual. at least that's the starting point. and repeal of obamacare and maybe some form of replacement or so if some changes going on in some big marketplaces, possibly, things will take longer but certainly in the course of the first six months or so the way some of these conversations are going to go.

what's the thinking about the impact with respect to the deficit? how is sort of the analysis going with, you know, is there consideration as to whether some of these policies depending on what you look at and we don't really know what the substance is going to be, but is the market going to start reacting more to concerns around deficit spending, should some of these proposals not be paid for or offset? >> i've been thinking about that question for a while. it doesn't seem like it is caught on yet. i've been waiting on s&p or movie to say wait a second, these deficit issues could have an impact. the president-elect has a lot of business experience, a lot of experience running companies with a very low bond rating, to put it kindly. [laughter] his views on deficits and growth are probably different than the deficit hawks, sort of at a core level. the deficit hawks are important

to the tea party and is based but it doesn't seem like they're getting a lot of love yet, at least early days. to mean the infrastructure is a very plausible thing for him to do. he's a real estate guy. he's built things over his life. it's very appealing to them. also he has some bipartisan support as long as he does get the deficit to out of control. he can talk about going back health care and dodd-frank that's going to be a very difficult fight, where as his infrastructure projects, i don't think he would be as hard a fight for them. >> i think it will be harder because you are, there is bipartisan support for the idea of infrastructure spending. but the method in which you do that is there is very little bipartisan agreement and democrats are already starting to coalesce around the idea that they would fight and infrastructure program that's based on credits for private corporations. they're talking about it as corporate welfare and they will continue to do that if there's

not a big public spending piece of but that is the government building stuff. again, you get, can he just muscled through a republican congress? i don't know that he can come if you have a filibuster in senate of democrats saying we love the idea of rebuilding our roads and bridges but we don't love the idea that this is all a handout to big corporations. we are going to fight it and this is not what trump voters voted for. it's a broader message, immigrants haven't quite figured it out yet but at some point there will be a theory of the case against trump which is what you voted for is not which are getting bigger getting millionaires and billionaires all these important jobs, across the board tax cuts for rich people, getting an infrastructure program that is designed for corporate america. if they can figure that all out and coalesced around it, i don't think there's some slam dunk for an infrastructure built. >> there's only so much bandwidth in a white house and in congress for major overhauls. remember i had a conversation

with the chief of staff for bush going into the second administration, and he just went out from all these things are going to do. i said, that's a lot of stuff. andes goes the president is very ambitious. i said, you could maybe not give any of this done. actually you are involved in this, we're just because we didn't get a lot of it done. >> social security, immigration, none of it. >> i don't how much there was a result of it being that, but it's like one thing or two things, maybe. then you've got to get over the hump of the midterms. because that's going to be key. so this two year window, i think what does he choose to focus on? if you think about the enormity of immigration reform and dodd-frank, and a tax cut proposal and repatriation and, even just the repatriation proposal which we were talking

earlier, it includes pretty major overhaul in the tax system going from a territorial, to a territorial system and then the repatriation of top of that. it's a pretty big undertaking for come if you're right, that they don't get up to speed until sometime around august, if you get the secretary in there, i forget, you are going can guide was fined up to speed to give that? i guess it was february. >> of '09. >> that was a disaster. he should have shut up within. >> a deer in headlights. >> i did the interview in the market was, took a step to every word he said. even the word the spin that was not a high point of the obama administration. >> that was an argument to shut up right thing. you wait until your undersecretaries. not to mention the job that you did which was laid the congressional liaison.

>> the white house job will be filled. they don't need confirmation. he will have those positions filled out day one. >> another thing to watch is what is economic policy come from? some presidents choose to use the treasury and some choose to keep -- >> economic counselor. >> you are familiar with the format. >> the other thing to take into account when talking about the massive agenda and the difficulty of getting a lot of it or any of the done is the fact they will have to do confirmation fight for some of these people, sessions will have a fight. there may be others about the confirmation hearings and then a supreme court justice takes up most of the bandwidth in any administration, or a lot of the bandwidth. sort of caution for people who think that a full rewrite of the corporate individual tax code along with infrastructure spending, dodd-frank repeal, obama to repeal, pump the brakes. >> can i add one thing to this, which is a this to me says that

i should read and understand a paul ryan plan best. geithner had taken during the crisis and it was this phrase. plan b is now playing. remember that? he would come to the meeting, the world would be in total chaos. he would come to the meeting and have a plan. whether or not it was the right point, it was a plan. >> whoever has the plan dictates a century the policy. >> the extent to which they don't have to wait to review all the stuff in that away.gov, and i read a bunch of it. maybe i need to memorize it. >> they had the bones of there. >> a lot of policy ideas that can be translated. >> you saw in the campaign the first and second iterations of the comp tax reform plan moved from rates, cut someone i could happen much closer to the paul ryan and kevin brady set of rate cuts. that's probably where they will wind up. >> hold on. don't overstate that.

it still ride on steroids. >> but maybe less like human growth hormone and maybe -- >> like a nasal spray. >> nasal steroids. >> he went from 12 to 10 to six and bryant is at three. >> but you could see them working those details out. and i could see she trump administration not being too proprietary about paul ryan kind of driving the bus on corporate tax reform, individual debt and tax reform. and taking a credible when it's done. he's a headlines guy. he's not a details guy. >> i'm going to open it to the audience and the second by to comment on what ben and steve are saying. you have personal and supreme court and minimum of two budget resolutions and repeal of obamacare and all of these things not come it's going to take a lot of time to the interesting challenge will be how the administration tries to do with the fact that they would

be running up against government operating far more slowly than perhaps they think it ought to be and the kind of pressure on already told anecdotally that the house had become the schedule so they could determine what is there going to be in and go out, the days that were listed they had three weeks and, when we can't. tradition have the congress has been operating. they don't vote monday's and fudge. that trump transition to look at the calendar and said, this doesn't work because i work seven days a week and you guys really are not here. so the calendar would -- went back and got revised. .. around the amount of things that need to get addressed and

understanding there is a short window that they will try to push it, but at at some point the twitter account will push them to act more rapidly than the congress is willing or able to do. i think that tension will be an interesting dialogue for you guys to write about. >> interesting is an understatement. you can see where trump declares war on the republican congress. any of that is possible. they could be a complete odds with each other within three or six months of the administration. >> it will likely happen between three and six am. >> right. we are going to call it the tweet shift. >> okay i think we will open up for questions from the audience but i don't know there's a microphone. >> you are laughing like this is

hysterical. it's not funny. >> some of it is funny. >> he will be up at 3:00 a.m. >> just let us laugh in the face of who are in misery. >> i think it's all good. i'm psyched happy days are here again. >> the microphone is there and we have questions. i to fall to moderator modes because i moderate many of these things. >> 2016 was supposed to be a good year for democrats. they are looking to fill a lot more democratic seats. >> so 2016 was supposed to be a good year for democrats and the senate, 2018 was post to be the year they were defending a lot more seats and therefore we are looking to lose ground. how does that play in terms of dynamics now. does that encourage democrats to compromise knowing the situation could get far worse in 2018 or or does it encourage republicans to hold back a little bit, expecting expecting to get that

62 majority? >> that's a great question and you're absolutely right, it's dismal and terrible math for democrats in 2018. they fully expected to win when the senate in 16 and when it back in lose it in 18. how that changes the political dynamic, someone's part of them he will have to figure that out. i do think there is some incentive for democrats and those vulnerable seats to show that they have achieved something on a legislative front in terms of economic policy. whether there's anything that is put forward that they can support that doesn't then make them vulnerable to primary challenges to the left, you have to remember while trump did win the electoral college, he did not win the popular vote, he doesn't have this massive mandate with a lot of pressure on democrats to stand up to trump and resist drum. i just don't think we know the answer until we know what his

legislative agenda looks like and what they're being asked to vote on. it could go either way. they could decide they have to not be destruction us and get through some economic legislation that could boost economic growth or they could decide that he so unpopular and toxic that they can block him at every turn and be rewarded for it. it's too soon to answer that. >> we are in new york and nobody mentioned senator schumer. he was never forgotten in wall street. a big part of his constituencies [inaudible] what role does he have that postelection, assuming that he is minority leader.

>> can i make one comment because i heard a great quote on him being the democratic leader. he said republicans should be more scared than the democrats or equally as scared in terms of that relationship and i think there is some truth to what kind of dialogue could happen between the white house and the senate democrats for coalition. >> i will let ben or aaron answer this, but real quickly, mark i would call you and ask you that question. you obviously would have some great thoughts on that. the issue to me is, in a normal world, we would perhaps pass.frank as it wasn't gone back and revisited it in at least a four-year timeframe, if senator schumer can possibly be

a bridge between the extremes on the left and, tell me if i'm speaking naïvely here, who don't want to touch that all in the extremes on the right who want to get rid of it, then i think he could play an amazing and constructive role where i don't think schumer wants to be seen as the guy who is coddling wall street, but i think there's a lot of smart people we've talked too on wall street who are very convincing about the negative macroeconomic effects of dodd frank that argue for loosening it in some regards, normal reasonable people might have done. that's my answer. >> i think you've basically got it right. they're very different dynamics for schumer as if democrats had taken the senate to block republican efforts. now he can cast himself as the

broker who protects the most important pieces, is reasonable on things that maybe need tweets and changes that have bipartisan support, and it's going to be one of these delicate political balances. schumer is as good of anybody of figuring those out and playing them the best way to his political advantage. i do think steve is absolutely right, he could play that role as broker between the left that says don't touch anything, scream and fight and yell all the way and schumer saying there's going to be changes, let's make them as painless and positive as possible. i don't make it unreasonable to think he could do that. >> i agree he is in a key role. he'll have one on one side and trump on the other and like you said there both new yorkers and it wouldn't surprise me too see them do a deal on certain things or for schumer too say i'll deal

with you on one item but were not touching this item and that might work. on the other hand, he's got got to keep in mind the midterms and he will want to do things that add to the democrats standing in the house in the senate even if it is seeming pretty hopeless at this point. he will have to keep an eye on that in four years. >> want to offer one idea. there's a constituency of senators in the middle, schumer, corker, warner hansen. if these guys are loony,, i don't mean that majority please, could you see a scenario where i take your job as moderator. >> that's kind of fun. >> where these middle senators gain power and is there a certain sanity that would overtake. >> i think political had a great

spot on this. the list of senators. [inaudible] >> we used passionate progressives. there will be this group of moderates from swing states who will want to have some motivation to get stuff done. it will all depend on trump's popularity, how he is seen by the public, whether there's a lot of public support for his agenda, how he's behaving in office, if it looks like he's doing well and has put together reasonable legislative packages on spending, there will be democrats who want to cross the line and not filibuster and get the stuff past, but figuring out

what they want to do and how they will feel, we have to figure out the rest of the transition process and how the early days of the administration plays at some self-doubt, if it's a nasty mass in his tweeting stuff 247 and population popularity goes from 42 down to the 30s, then you'll see people running away from him left and right. i hate to say wait to see but you have to wait and see. >> questions? anyone else from the audience? okay prerogative of the moderator. we could talk about the redskins and the cowboys. >> we have to talk about trade. >> okay, i'd rather talk about sports. >> so probably the one challenge, and i will look to aaron and then ben, you've got

all this exuberance in the marketplace around certain policies, but we also know that when it comes to trade there are questions of re- negotiating nafta, the transpacific partnership he's withdrawing, he wants to lift china as a currency manipulator, there's a lot of potential policies early on. then, a number of enforcement mechanisms to use commerce to bring actions on unfair trade. for many in the room, i can can put my city hat on and we can look at the anti-globalization trend that's been going on around the world and whether we look at the british exit vote were current elections in france or potentially what's coming up in germany for all the other stories around this anti- globalization that helped elect trump. the anti- trade message was incredibly strong as we look out to the rust belt state. what should we be thinking about, what should business be thinking about and what should the markets do and think as we

go forward. i think one of the challenges is you can have all this potential stimulus on the tech side and the will have questions around trade that will really potentially lead to a lack of growth in the economy if there are tariffs and things that are exceptionally high. >> the stance of the u.s. will radically change. it will be unashamedly america first. he wants to tear up nafta which puts mexico in an instant deficit almost overnight. he wants to have real openers after five years and take a step back. he just wants to see if it's working. he also wants wants each side to go into negotiations with firm estimates of the impact on

industry and job, and it's going to be a complete change. >> historically the problem with tariffs and trade policy is that you might get a bigger slice of the high but the overall global pie is not as big or growing as fast. i think he wants the economy to grow and he wants america to grow first and foremost. i think it's when you be one of the most important areas in terms of how the market reacts to that. putting on the rose colored glasses, if he goes in and he negotiates better trade deal for america that other countries can live with, that's probably probably a good thing, but if they retaliate, it could be a vicious circle situation. i think there's a lot of risk there in the market that may be is not being looked at as a moment. >> if donald trump goes to his briefings, it was intended of a

joke but maybe to settle he will get to briefings. one is he will learn about the hope ufo thing in area 51. that's the first thing. the the second briefing he will get, and hopefully this will sink in is how america runs the world through its trade agreements. and through the different ifi's and organizations. he'll be like oh, that's why we do that and he'll get the briefing that will tell him that there's a couple reasons why we maybe want to help mexico. there may be reasons why we may want to have the current set of agreement that might be engendered in t pp and they might be as much about military security as they are about economic security and there may

be a reason why i doesn't add up to the u.s. in the ledger because there's an asset over here that's not counted in security. one of the things i thought in post- british exit is we created economic agreements so we wouldn't kill each other and i think we forgot not entirely. it's impossible to measure some of these trade agreements the way donald trump is putting forward. we have a deficit with them and to some extent that's a negative for them. i think what he will find is there was some sense behind the obama form policy and trade policy and it was, on a number spaces, america's last great

that it was. as as a percentage of total gdp, the u.s. percentage has declined the question is how do we maintain our greatness or being great and authority over the world trade system in a world where other countries, somewhat to our benefit, are getting wealthier. globalization is a reality. our trade agreement should be the rules by which we live in that reality. >> i wish i could get that ufo breathing. this is another one of where it's a matter of which advisors around trump have the most influence there are other people who believe that when other countries when we lose and

there's others who say, generally speaking, more global trade is better for the world and ultimately better for us protecting ttp's history. i think it's an unfortunate that that's the case. i don't know who will openly win the argument. i think you look for instances where you can say i kept x number of jobs by browbeating a company not to move or making some small move that does that. then whatever you do massive tariffs on mexico or china, that would be insane so i don't think you will do it. >> he moves on china import chair for something like that, china decides its next big order from planes goes to airbus. boeing knocks on the door and says trump, mr. president, look what happened.

then you will understand the dynamic. i remember when i was overseas, you could, for better or worse, u.s. foreign-policy was boeing foreign-policy was bank opening up form policy. that's where the things that america would put on its list. that's one form policy was all about, while some of it. >> i just don't think he's going to create trade wars because the results would be disastrous. he could be so temperamental that he gets irritated by something china's done and he does start a war. i think you have enough people around him to say dude, you can do it, just don't. >> i think on that note we have reached our allotted time so i want to thank erin and ben and steve and ben, so thank you for joining the panel. [applause]

>> road to the white house coverage continues later today as donald trump travels to lay it will north carolina as he continues his victory to her. that rally starts live at seven pm on c-span2. >> follow the transition of government on c-span as president-elect donald trump selects his cabinet and the republicans and democrats prepare for the next congress, we will take you to key events as they happen without interruption. watch live on c-span. watch on-demand at c-span.org or listen on our free c-span radio app. >> the senate is in recess for their weekly party caucuses. they will be back at 215 eastern eastern. we will have live coverage on c-span2. mike pence is attending the republican lunch today. a final passage vote on the medical research bill is

expected later today and we are awaiting mitch mcconnell's announcement on on the vote time. earlier today they paid tribute to two departing senators. >> yesterday the senate voted p overwhelmingly to take the next step to pass the 26 century bipartisan legislation. this legislation promotes critical investments and research and treatment development. it helps that throughof unnecessary regulations that would handle the development of cures while also protecting safety. this legislation puts patients first, help help strengthen the kind of research and treatments needed to cure the most devastating diseases and it includes provisions to help enhance mental health programs

and funding to help fight opioid abuse. i've heard from health professionals across my state who expressed the impact this legislation can make. from the kentucky hospital association to the university of kentucky, our state's largest university. this reflects the growing support from congress for increased investment in research that addresses the compelling questions of our day. i will be pleased to welcome you to the capital this morning.er this is one example of how the university will be better equipped to improve the lives of those in our commonwealth. we know this bill would be possible without chairman alexanders efforts alongside ranking member murray to drive it forward. we thank them both as well as. the senators who endeavored to

make the bill the strongest it could be. i also want to recognize my friend, vice president biden who joined us yesterday for his efforts to include his cancer moonshot initiative in the package. this is an issue that hits close to home for the vice president, as we all know, and he has been a leading a leading voice in supporting efforts to strengthen cancer research and to find a cure. i am pleased it will pass this legislation soon so we can begin to put its provisions to work on behalf of american families. now, on the other important issues before the senate, i've spoken with the speaker on a number of occasions about an a issue like those i represent in kentucky and have insisted that they put include a provision so these retirees don't lose their health care benefits at the end of this year. we hope to have a final bill to share with members and we look to turning to it as soon as

possible after house action. i would more to say on that later. we are also working to wrap up a number of conference reports including for the defense authorization bill and the water resources development bill. last night i took the next step on the report so we can pass it this week. this legislation will provide more of the tools, service members need to take on national security challenges, help strengthen armed military posture and support our men and women in uniform with the benefits and the pay raisest they've earned. i hope the senate also take the next step soon on the water development resources report. in this report will invest in our nation's waterways and infrastructures and have commerce and support with safe and reliable water sources to prevent ones that we saw in flint michigan. to that point, this bill also includes assistance for families like those in flint who have already been influenced by lead

poisoning. will remember where we were on00 september the 11th, 2001. the man we honor today certainly does. he was in berlin. had only just begun his second day of ambassador to germany and then everything changed. planes smashed into the world trade center, terrorists attacked the pentagon where his son-in-law worked and his family emerged unbroken that they but others were not so fortunate. the investor found himself

thrown into a role he couldn't foresee a date earlier. s it was one that would forever change them. those who note dan coats say that they affected him profoundly. sharpened him as a policymaker, it clarified mistakes and his sense of responsibility. he may not have known and done, but he would feel the tug of that responsibility many years later and answer the call.wh senator coates has enjoyed a successful career when he decided to retire in 1998. he earned a reputation for working hard, getting things accomplished, becoming an indispensable member of his conference. in fact, after he announced his decision not to seek reelection, the majority leader called him up and said you can't leave, i

can't go forward in the senate without you. his success was no accident. he learned the legislative ropes working for an up-and-coming congressman named dan quayle. he applied that knowledge as he progressed from his staffer to his successor. first in the house than in the senate. this was evident whether dan wau focused on rebuilding the military after the cold war, bringing opportunities to low income families and children, even dissecting the final points of american garbage policy. yes, garbage policy. in the beginning of his time in the senate, landfills were filling with new jersey trash and hoosiers were fed up. in came dan with a warcry, don't jump on us and just the right blend of determination, legislative know-how and humor

to capture the attention of colleagues in the hearts of constituents. somewhere amused in d.c. or trenton, but back in indiana,d. hoosiers were over the moon. too many, their first introduction to this new senator came from his famous trash add, the coats for senate commercial which featured a cigar man fromo new jersey earned him a place in the hallowed halls of the campaign and perhaps a ticket back to the senate.or l while he may not have been ableu to persuade dan to run for reelection eight years later, he did offer the statement as he bid him farewell.have a dan coats is leaving the senate he said, but he's not leaving us i have a feeling he's going to have a real influence in manyse ways for the rest of his life and he's going to stay close to all of us. how right he was.

fast-forward to just over a decade later, former senator coates looked out and saw age country in crisis. a draft on the world stage. stagnant at home, sliding into. despair. dan was deeply unsettled. he shared his concerns with his wife marcia. he realized he had two choices. he could sit back and watch or he could do something. dan coats chose to do something. his election was hardly a sure thing. he pulled through anyway. when he returned to the capitalm he put his head down and gotoe right to work. dan can be a man of few words. he doesn't always feel the need to speak up, but when he does people pay attention. it's a true mark of distinction

in a body like this, with its big egos and sharp elbows. people listen to him when he explains the ins and outs of form policy. people listen to him when hehi dissects the problems of obamacare. when this fiscal as expert shares his waste of the week, people pay attention. it is how we learned taxpayer dollars were being spent on swedish massages for bunny rabbits. it's how we discovered taxpayer money was being wasted to determine whether hunger plus anger is a real thing. senator coates knew he wasn't going to solve all of our nation's problems as one senatot in one term, but he understood the important contributions he could make. he also recognized his responsibility to make them. in the process he submitted a

legacy that will long outlast him here in the senate. own it will certainly continue on in my office, my own chief of staff is a coach. speaker ryan, chief of staff is another coates alarm. the list of his staffers were gone on too achieve great things to incoming indiana governor is as long as it is impressive. wry i know dan is looking forward to spending more time at wrigley field after he retires. here's the tweet dan sent out last month.in a century in the making, we finally made it, what a a great day to be a cubs fan.ho it's hard to overstate the importance of the moment for him. this is a guy who spent part of

his honeymoon at wrigley field.n i wonder if maybe, just maybe, he, he was able to see a little of himself in his favorite teama maybe, in a a guy like fellow indiana university hoosier kyle schwaber, standout player who stepped away from the game for season and then came back and picked right up where he left off without a hitch, knocking out of the park just when his team needed him most. dan promises he's not coming back a third time. we will see. or it's obvious dan never needed the office or the title, not the first time, not the second time, not a third time. that said, i note dan isn't going to stop caring. i know he isn't going to stop working so we are going to keepa the bat signal plugged in should the people call out for a hero yet again, and i hope our friend

will suit up one more time,ng because of nothing else we are really going to miss him. let us recognize and congratulate senator coates for his many years of service, let us wish him wellin his latest retirement and let me personally thank him for his wise counsel and trusted friendship. i will miss you my friend.e when one to be intimidated by a challenge. he is willing to work hard even when the going gets tough, he

never shies away from a tough fr debate and he always comes prepared. he has been defying the odds for a long time and inspiring others along the way. t nearly five years ago senator kirk suffered a debilitating stroke, one that threatened to end his senate service nearly as soon as it had begun. in the blink of an eye, kirk went from juggling meetings and committee hearings to lying in hospital bed wondering if he would ever walk again. a or talk again, or read again. if he had had decided to just quit the senate and focus on his recovery, no one would have blamed him, but he didn't do that. he never lost hope, he never gave up. he set his sights on getting back to work for the people of

illinois and the nation. that's exactly what he did. we were there to witness his triumph triumph several months h later. he had a smile on his face, joe to one side, joe biden together, 1 foot in front of the other senator mark kirk climbed and climbed and climbed. he ascended each of those 45 steps to the top of this chamber as we all cheered him on. he could rest assured no one was going to let him fail or fall that day. senator mansion could rest assure he would not have to go another day waiting for his buddies return. s days after his stroke the senator hopped on a flight from chicago to check on his friend.

he saw firsthand the many challenges he had to overcome in recovery, but he never doubted marks will, determination or desire to get back to work. he says he's like the energy energizer bunny. he just keeps going and going and going.l they might seemed like an unconventional pair, one's a democrat, the other republican, the west virginia and is an illinois man and the other is a gamer. senator kirk a sense of scrapere but they just quit clicked from day one and quickly became the best of friends. now they go boating together,su they meet for lunch nearly every thursday and they support each other. the support of good friends has been critical to senator kirk

dramatic recovery. after he's found support in other places including the mailbox. a few weeks after his stroke, a 9-year-old fellow stroke survivor from illinois wrote senator kirk to share his ownp story and some words of y encouragement. don't give up on yourself jackson wrote, all the hard work is worth it. ps, he said, i think kids should get paid to go to school. the pair quickly become penpals and even picked up a new joint sport of power climbing in their rehabilitation. he calls jackson his personalng hero. last year he invited him to visit washington and be his guest at the state of the union. to hear kirk tell it, he may ma have never made it back from that address at all without

jackson support and kind words. i know the support he received from his fellow home state senator didn't go unnoticed either. after his stroke he visited him offering to help out however he could. be his story reminds us that the senate can be more than just a place to work, it can actually be a family. in his own words, the the things that divide us in politics are insignificant compared with the dignity of our common humanity. it's a powerful message. i think it's one we can all learn from. senator kirk says that america's men and women in uniform represent the greatest force for human dignity on earth. he's right.y the work he has done too help us meet the obligation our nation has two military families andnd our veterans will endure beyond his term. mark kirk, a veteran himself understands the sacrifices that our servicemen and their

families make each day on our behalf. he knows they deserve our full support, not not only when they are on active duty, but after their doers are complete.ar that's why he has worked to help guarantee the quality healthcare that our heroes are counting on. it's why he has worked to help eliminate corruption within the. va so that our veterans receive timely care as well. he has proven himself as a leader on national security issues, too. he understands the value of our livelihood and works to strengthen them, especially with israel. he has a clear view of our adversaries and has never been afraid to speak out or take action from north korea to around. when it comes to iran specifically, he was the tip of he he brought attention to the threat of their aggressive

legislation to help hold chiron accountable. he's -- to help hold chiron ab he doesn't back down and thinks to him we were able to see the legislation through.ing the so senator kirk may be leaving the senate but he's not done yet. we know he won't stop looking out for our country and advocate for survivors.f he will just keep going and going and going like he always does.

each of us that it's possible to persevere even through the most difficult of obstacles. today we thank him for the impact he has made on this body, for the inspiration he has been too so many and for the years he has dedicated to serving the people of illinois. >> joining us on the phone right now to discuss action in the senate when it takes a look atss medical issue, alex rogers, national journal and a staff correspondent. we are having you on too talk about something called 24 century care act.w what is that and how would you explain that to people? >> the 21st century here's act is a major health care reform piece of legislation that funds a number of priorities, the brain initiative the precision medicine and vice president joe

biden's cancer shot. it also has new medical treatments and streamline approval process trying to bring some medicines to the market more quickly. >> what is the price tag for this legislation? >> it is $6.3 billion total overall.ings it marries the funding that democrats really like and it also brings some of the regulatory reforms that democrats support. were talking about a three year process in house has passed it overwhelmingly and the senate is looking to consider and pass it within the next 24 hours four hours. >> talk about the drug companiee , what is their response to this? do they benefit from this legislation? >> sure, so the pharmaceutical companies are broadly in favor of it and there are some groups who oppose it. public citizen would say, this

is the standard of the fda, meanwhile they'll they'll point out that hundreds and hundreds of lobbyists have been working on this bill for years trying to get it passed and just because of how there including somell things for democrats, billionid dollars for opioid funding, they been able to marry a bride of different issues to cut try to get this across the line in the lame-duck. >> we saw him on the senate floor yesterday when this was being considered, he was talking about what was going on and there was an interaction between him and mitch mcconnell. >> sure. vice president joe biden camehe yesterday and was the presiding officer and chair, the vice president was also a senator for 366 years and he talked to reporters "after words" about how this kind of felt like homee to him and senator mitch mcconnell, the majority leader

brought a measure to rename parts of it 21st century act for the vice vice president son who died of brain cancer last year, the vice president as he was considering a run forg president was clearly grieving over the loss of his son and was also extremely emotional yesterday as all his senators clapped and cheered as theyed renamed aspects of this bill for his son. >> the senate, considering the 21st-century cures act and alex rogers of the national journal is talking to us about it. before before we let you go, one more quick question about harry reid. >> the democratic leader will have his last floor speech tomorrow, it will be highly anticipated and tomorrow evening

there will be a number of different speeches. mitch mcconnell will speak, hillary clinton is expected to speak and also vice president bidens. >> thank you for your time this morning. >> thank you i appreciate it. we have more senate news from the hill.com. a bipartisan water bill is making it dangerous in the senate because of california drought language. the number two democrats heather's probably enough opposition in his party to block the legislation from moving forward in the upper chamber. the package is on track for the house this week and has dozens of water related projects around the country. it also authorizes emergency aid for flint michigan which has a contaminated water supply. kevin mccarthy and senator dianne feinstein also slipped in long desired language to provide drought relief.

it would temporarily relax environmental standards and instruct federal officials too direct more waters in the federal water infrastructure in the garden state. >> the senate will be back shortly from their weekly meeting. vice president elect mike pence is attending the republican lunch this afternoon. a final passage vote on the $6.3 billion medical research bill, including cancer funding, is expected later today. we are also awaiting mitch mcconnell's announcement on the vote time. it it could be later this evening, maybe around 10:00 p.m. later in the week, the senate could turn to a defense policy bill and talks continue off the floor on short-term funding to keep the government open until april 28. current funding expires on friday. live coverage of the senate when members return here on c-span2. .

the distinguished senator from vermont is recognized. mr. leahy: i thank the distinguished presiding officer, my friend from kansas. mr. president, in an editorial this morning in "the new york times" was entitled "why the lies about voting fraud"? ten years