environment secretary saying energy s insufficient going into these brexit negotiations. their words, mister speaker, not mine. isn't it true this government has no energy, no agreed plan, no strategy to deliver a good brexit for britain. >> can i say to the right honorable gentlemen, you talk about voting against tax avoidance measures. it was the labour party that if you refused to allow tax avoidance measures in the general election. he should look at his own record. he talks about people taking different opinions. i might remind himon monday , perhaps he would like to listen to this. [cheering] on monday when we opened that important piece of legislation in relation to

taxation in europe, 76 labor mps voted at a different lobby then his. the party in this. >> the senate about to open today's session. we will take you to the floor in just a moment. senators expected to recess after leaders give their opening remarks to break for a meeting as president trump is

the presiding officer : the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. o god, you are the source of life and peace. praised be your name forever.

we know it is you who can turn our thoughts toward peace and unity. use your power to transform our minds and hearts. lord, as our senators face the challenges of today and tomorrow, give them a faith that will find opportunities in every adversity. may they cast their burdens on you, trusting your loving kindness and tender mercies. give them an understanding that puts an end to strife; mercy that quenches animosity, and forgiveness that overcomes resentment.

may each day be for them a building block for making america a nation that glorifies you. we pray in your mighty name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., november 28, 2017. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the

senate, i here by appoint the honorable steve danes to perform the duties of the chair. signed orrin g. hatch. president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. mr. daines: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from montana. mr. daines: i understand there is a bill at the desk due for a

second reading. the presiding officer: the senator is correct. the clerk will read the title of the bill for the secretary timed. the clerk: h.r. 1, an act for reconciliation for the budget for fiscal year 2018. mr. daines: in order to place the bill on the calendar, i would object to further proceedings. the presiding officer: objection having been heard, the bill will be placed on the calendar. mr. daines: mr. president, i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to the consideration of s. res. 343 submitted he'll earlier today. -- earlier today. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: to authorize testimony, document production in arizona via mark lewis prich adder. -- pritchard. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, the senate

will proceed. mr. daines: i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. daines: mr. president, i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. durbin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the assistant democratic leader. mr. durbin: i ask consent that the quorum call be suspended and to speak in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, this week many things will happen in washington, but the focus of the senate chamber later on this week will be on the republican tax plan. it is a plan which has come upon us very quickly, in a matter of weeks, and it literally will affect the economy of the united states and virtually every taxpayer. there's hardly a measure we could entertain that has such

broad and far-reaching impact on the future of this country and its economy. what we are trying to do now is to analyze this plan. it has been put on a fast schedule. i can guarantee you, as i stand here, that because of this hurry-up approach on the tax reform, when it is all said and done, if it is all enacted into law, we look back with regret not having taken the time to do it correctly, not having to do it for changes on the family and the economy. so far we have a plan that was considered and passed by the house of representatives also on a fast schedule and one in the senate as well and the one in the senate will be up for consideration this week. it's going to be on a procedure that was established in the senate years ago called reconciliation. for the outsider, it's a long word which by senate definition

means that a simple majority vote is all that's necessary to pass this measure. it will not be subject to the traditional filibuster in the senate or the need for 60 votes in most instances. it was designed in its inception to reduce the deficit. ironically what we will see with the proposed senate tax plan is an increase in the debt rather than a deduction. that seems to be the intent of the sponsors and it is what we will consider. we took a look at some of the proposals in the senate republican plan. it's no secret that this plan would bankroll massive tax cuts for the wealthiest people in america and the largest corporations and it would raise taxes on middle-income families. if that seems like contrary thinking to what most americans were looking for, it is. time p and -- time and again we were told that the average american needs a helping hand.

i certainly understand that in oil know and a -- in illinois and across the nation. this tax plan will not help working families. at best it gives them a temporary tax cut which later ends up as a tax increase. however, if you happen to be among the wealthiest americans, good news in the republican plan, there will be substantial tax cuts in the permanent law. the work for -- the help for the working families is temporary, the help for corporations is permanent. to put it in perspective from the corporate point of view, we can understand those who argue that lowering taxes on business will incentivize them to expand their business, and yet there are a couple of things we have to acknowledge. as a percentage of the gross domestic product, corporate profits in america have never been higher. as a percentage of gross domestic product corporate taxes paid have never been lower.

profits at their highest, taxes at their lowest, and the republicans come to us and say, well, clearly what we need to do is cut corporate taxes again. i disagree. when i asked secretary mnuchin at a hearing, shouldn't our goal be to not only have a growing economy, but to have more fairness in the economy for working families who continue to put in the hours and put in the work and watch their own income fall behind the expenses that they face? well, he agreed with my conclusion, but he couldn't explain how the republican tax plan would meet that goal. i don't think it does. i do not exaggerate it when i say this is a tax cut for the republicans for the wealthiest. the nonpartisan joint committee on taxation shows that by 2027 as corporations are enjoying a huge tax cut, on average,

taxpayers who earn less than $75,000 a year will see their taxes go up under the republican plan. you might think that is a press release from the democratic national committee. no. it was an analysis on the committee on taxation. that is a group that measures the tax. it is not a few, on average taxpayers in every income bracket earning less than $75,000 would see their taxes increase under the republican plan. well, how do the wealthy fair? well, it's no surprise under the republican plan the largest tax cuts under the bill go to the wealthiest households. i get a lot of letters and e-mails, telephone calls, there aren't a lot of rich people calling me and saying, we need a tax break, senator. they are not asking for it. they don't have to ask for it

when the republicans write a tax bill. as the republicans throw huge tax breaks to the wealthiest americans, they lower the top income tax bracket and they double the exemption for the estate tax. they go straight after a deduction that helps one-third of all their taxpayers lower their taxes, the state and local tax deduction, they cut that, but they give these tax breaks to people who are already millionaires, many times over. the republican plan would eliminate the state and local tax deduction, a deduction that helps millions of middle-class families avoid being taxed twice on their hard-earned income, once at the state and local level, again at the federal level. the state of illinois is an example, and most other states, where you would pay a state income tax. currently you can deduct that state income tax paid from any federal tax liability. the premise is simple. you shouldn't be taxed on a tax.

the republicans turn that upside down, and they would tax the tax you paid at the state and local level. eliminating this vital deduction makes it more expensive for families to fund local services, schools, police departments, fire departments, and local roads and bridges. and in my state, it has the fifth highest number of taxpayers claiming this deduction, nearly two million illinoisans would no longer be able to claim more than $22 billion in state and local tax deductions as they did in twist -- in 2015. so what's the republican motivation for eliminating this deduction that's so important for middle-class families? that's how they pay for the tax cuts for those at the highest income telephones, and that's how they help the largest corporations cut their tax bills. this is wrong. if there was ever a question about who the republicans are writing this plan for, look no further than the changes made during the committee session

when they decided they wouldn't stop merely raising taxes on millions of middle-class families in order to pay for permanent corporate tax cuts, they also were willing to raise families' health insurance premiums. not bad enough that your tax bill is going to go up for most middle-class families under the republican plan. they have deviced a way to increase -- devised a way to increase your health insurance premiums at the same time. what a breakthrough. republicans can't help themselves. even in the face of opposition from the american people, hospitals, patients, nurses, seniors, faith leaders, their tax bill would pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% by repealing part of the affordable care act. this change alone means that 13 million americans will lose their health insurance, and it means that the health insurance premiums paid by many others will increase by at least 10% a year. perfect. not only are they going to raise taxes on working families,

they're going to raise the cost of health insurance for those buying policies and eliminate health insurance protection for 13 million americans. 13 million americans lose their health insurance. millions more see their premiums spike, all to give corporations and the wealthiest people in america a tax cut. to my republican colleagues, i ask when is it enough? haven't we helped the wealthy enough, at least for a day or two? shouldn't we focus on middle-class families? sadly, the threat to working families doesn't stop with a hike to their tax bill. in order to find even more money to fund tax cuts for corporations and the highest earners in america, republicans agree to add $1.5 trillion to the national deficit. $1.5 trillion. how many times have we heard members of congress, usually on the republican side of the aisle, come to the floor and

pose for holy pictures when it comes to the national debt? well, they certainly have a lot of sermons to deliver when they have a democratic president, and they suffer from political amnesia when they have a republican president. now they're going to add $1.5 trillion to the national debt to give tax breaks to wealthy people and big corporations. mr. president, i have served in this body for many years. i have heard lecture after lecture from republicans saying until they are red in the face about the importance of fiscal responsibility. i have listened to my republican colleagues speak at length about the need for spending offsets. they want spending offsets for food stamps for hungry americans. they wanted spending offsets for hurricane sandy victims when a hurricane hit the new york-new jersey area. they wanted setoffs and relief for meals on wheels for seniors. where are these deficit hawks now? the director of the office of management and budget,

mr. mulvaney, who made a name for himself while this congress, railing against increasing the debt ceiling is now advocating for the republican tax plan, saying we need to have new deficits. spare me. and i have heard the calls from majority leader mcconnell who once asked, quote, at what point do we anticipate getting serious here about doing something about deficit and debt? the words of senator mcconnell to that senator and my republican colleagues, i say how about now? so-called fiscally conservative republicans are hiding behind widely debunked economic growth projections and the so-called dynamic scoring, arguing that it looks like a $1.5 trillion increase to the deficit. it won't actually be one. the appropriately named laffer curve suggested that if you cut taxes on the wealthy, everybody gets well. it didn't work then when he proposed it. it hasn't worked since, and it won't work now. and yet, the republicans find

this as the only refuge for their increase to the deficit. over the weekend, however, it was announced the joint committee on taxation wouldn't have the time to produce a so-called dynamic score for the bill before the senate. so let me understand this. not only did republicans vote to explode the deficit, now they don't want to wait to see whether their weak defense for this fiscally irresponsible plan will actually work. this is hypocrisy. maybe it's because republicans know as well as the american people just how hollow their promises are on junk economics. want a preview of what dynamic scoring will hold? last week, an analysis was released that shows the senate bill would fail the republicans' own test, even when using their so-called dynamic scoring. make no mistake, once this happens, republicans will waste no time in making up the difference by calling for devastating cuts to america's vital programs. the republican budget even

spells this out for us. where they're going to turn when their approach falls apart. here's how they are going to do it. they are going to do it on the backs of hardworking americans with more than a trillion dollars in cuts in medicaid, and hang on tight, $470 billion worth of cuts in medicare. the harmful impact of seniors in low and middle-class families in some of the nation's most vulnerable from these budgetary cuts apparently justify to them a $1.5 trillion deficit hole that they're going to create with this tax plan helping the wealthiest people in america. under our current law, known as a pay-as-you-go law, harmful cuts get started as soon as january if this bill is passed. republicans are determined to have a, quote, win, close quote, before the end of the year. that's because if you were suffering from insome knee a -- insomnia and following the senate business over the course of last year, you have to wonder why we were here. in the course of the year, two

things happened of any moment. number one, filling a vacancy on the supreme court, and i'll save my analysis of that for another day, and secondly the passage of the defense authorization bill. that's it. two things. one year. and so the republicans before we leave for the so-called holiday recess want to have a feather in their cap. they want to be able to point to the fact they have actually passed something. and they're saying to their members this is a life-or-death proposal. you've got to pass this or we won't be able to point to hardly anything that we did during the course of one year of republican control of the senate. that's why they're determined to do this and do it quickly. the republicans' irresponsible deficit spending under this plan will trigger $150 billion of automatic cuts to mandatory spending each year for the next decade, regular cuts to medicare. to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, you just can't have it both ways.

you can't claim to be fiscally responsible and then vote for a plan that includes billions of dollars in budget gimmicks that would explode the deficit by up to $1.5 trillion over the first ten years and beyond, even with this great dynamic scoring theory which you're trying to sell. you can't claim to make a tax plan that prioritizes small business and then spend hundreds of billions of dollars giving huge multinational corporations already enjoying record profits a massive tax cut as well. and i might add, their bill, the republican tax bill, creates incentives, incentives for american corporations to move overseas, to make american jobs overseas. why in the world would we create a tax code incentive for that to happen? you can't choose to make the corporate tax cuts permanent at the expense of protecting working americans and then still claim this plan is going to help those same families. it's based on nothing more than

a wink and a promise to extend half a trillion dollars in middle-class tax cuts that no one wants to pay for. and you can't pretend to be above special interests and then include a provision in this tax bill, in the tax bill that will open drilling leases for 800,00c national wildlife refuge. one of america's last pristine, untouched wilderness places, home to more than 200 wildlife species and deserving of preservation. mr. president, i have come to the floor over the course of many years in debate about the arctic national wildlife refuge. senator ted stevens used to sit in that chair, and he couldn't wait until i finished the speech. he would stand up and say the senator from illinois, pointing at me, doesn't even know what the arctic wildlife refuge is. he has never been there. he has no idea what's going on up there. and so he shouldn't stand on the floor here and say things that he can't back up with his own personal experience and knowledge. and, mr. president, what i did

at that point was decide i was going to call his bluff. so i picked up, went up to the arctic national wildlife refuge, took a bush plane in, and camped out overnight in the refuge. trekked around, took a look for myself so i could back up some of the things i said on the floor. we were right on the canning river. you could look across the river at parts of the refuge that were managed by the state of alaska. on this side of the river where we camped, it was managed as a national wildlife refuge. there was a dramatic difference. roadways had been built on the stateside, not on the federal side. we had a pristine refuge area. the net result was really beautiful and impressive, and i couldn't wait to get back to the floor to debate senator stevens. since i had been there. i came back in the next debate, and he never raised the question again about whether i had been there, so i didn't get to give the speech on the floor. but i have been there. and to give up all of this land to drill for oil at a time when

we are saying to the middle east we don't need your oil as much as in the past, to drill for gas when fracking is finding natural gas in areas all over the continental united states, it hardly makes sense. it certainly doesn't if you have ever been there and seen this beautiful piece of real estate. i think the american people know the republicans, what they had in mind when they wrote this plan. it really does help their deep-pocketed donors. some of the republicans in the house have been very open about this. they have been told, one new york republican congressman, said don't come back to me unless you give me a tax break. well, he is very honest about it, but as far as i am concerned, that shouldn't be the motivation for passing of tax reform. one of the republican donors that i have referred to, and i quote him directly, said my donors are basically saying get it done or don't ever call me again. another one said, quote, financial contributions are going to stop if the republican tax plan doesn't pass. thank goodness for their honesty and candor. there are special interests that

will do well under this republican plan, and wealthy people as well, but i think it's time for us to look at this plan and look at it clearly and understand the negative impacts it is going to have on working americans. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. schumer: i want to thank my friend, former roommate, colleague in the leadership for, as usual, his articulate and on-the-money remarks about the tax bill. now, mr. president, we have a long to-do list before the end of the year, and time is running short. we had hoped to make progress with the administration on these issues in a meeting this afternoon. unfortunately, this morning, instead of leading, the president tweeted a blatantly inaccurate statement and then concluded i don't see a deal. the president said i don't see a deal three hours before our meeting, before he heard anything we had to say. given that the president doesn't see a deal between democrats and

the white house, leader pelosi and i believe the des path forward is to continue negotiating with our republican counterparts in congress instead. rather than going to the white house for a show meeting that won't result in an agreement from a president who doesn't see a deal, we have asked leader mcconnell and speaker ryan to meet with us this afternoon. we don't have any time to waste addressing the issues that confront us, so we're going to negotiate with republican leaders who may actually be interested in reaching a bipartisan agreement. if the president, who already earlier this year said, quote, our country needs a good shutdown, if the president isn't interested in addressing the difficult year agenda and wants to make the government shut down, we'll work with those republicans who are interested in funding the government as we

did in april. we have so many things to do. we have to fund the government. we have daca. we have the children's health insurance program. we must reinstate cost-sharing for health premiums and out-of-pocket costs. we have to deal with disasters. we have to defund our defense and nondefense sides of the government in a reasonable way. there's so much to do. we're eager to get that done in a bipartisan way. obviously, the president isn't, but hopefully leader mcconnell and speaker ryan are and we look forward to sitting down with them to resolve this in an amicable way as we did in april when the president wasn't involved and we got it done. now on the tax bill, mr. president, the republican tax bill. we're only a few days away from a final vote, but from all reports, the republicans are still debating significant changes to the text of the bill.

some are angling for a change to the pass-through provisions feeling a tax loophole for many high income individuals need to be widened even further. right now it's reported that 70% of these pass-throughs go to the top 1%. the changes that are being proposed would make it even worse. help small business? yes. don't open a giant loophole for wealthy hedge funds, big shop law firms, lobbyists. we don't need that. others are rightly worried about the impact this bill would have on the deficit and debt. what i'd remind all my republican colleagues is that with any more changes, it's virtually certain you'll be voting on a bill without any expert analysis of its impacts.

you'll be voting without any estimate of whether it will grow or shrink the economy. you'll be voting without a good sense of the long-termism pacts of the change -- long-term impacts of the changes you're making to the tax code. certainly, one week of markup in the finance committee with only one expert witness is not a satisfactory process. particularly considering the changing nature of this bill. changing the tax code in broad brush is a difficult thing. there are so many unintended consequences. if our republican colleagues should pass this bill and it becomes law and i hope it won't, week after week we're going to find new things in this bill, some intended, some not intended, and the people who voted for it are going to regret it and the public will ask why didn't you know? well, in a tax bill it's impossible to know all these things unless you sit out there in the sun and bake. so people, experts from around

the country, there are tens of thousands of tax lawyers paid to figure out ways around our tax code and help the wealthy who are their clients. and unless you about the bill carefully in sunlight, unless you have a lot of hearings, unless you hear from all kinds of witnesses, the result is usually quite bad for america with so many unintended consequences. so our republican colleagues in their rush to get a bill done are legislating in an irresponsible way, especially when it comes to coming to something as important and complex as the tax code. if the product were a great one, that would be one thing. we all know this is not a great product. we don't even hear our republican colleagues bragging about this product with a few exceptions. everyone says this could be better, that could be better, this could be better. every independent analysis has

shown that the tax bill will end up raising taxes on millions of middle-class families despite the early intentions of the president, the republican leaders. the tax policy center estimates that 60% of middle-class families will see a tax increase, 60% of middle-class families will see a tax increase by the time the bill is fully implemented. while folks making over a million dollars a year would get an average tax cut of over $40,000. some say well, they're making more money. they should get a bigger tax break. no. i would like to take every dollar of that $40,000 a millionaire gets and give it to the middle class. they're the ones who need the help, not the wealthy people. they're the ones who buy the products, keep the economy humming. they're the ones throughout the 1950's, 1960's, 1970's created the best economy america has ever had, not just the few

millionaires. it's astounding. if the president and republicans in congress set out to pass a middle-class tax cut as they claim, if that's where they set out, this bill completely misses the mark. meanwhile, the big winners, big corporations, the very wealthy are doing great already. estimates -- estate, worth over $1 million get a tax break. why is that? why is that? when average middle-class people are struggling. corporations get a permanent reduction in their rates while individual tax breaks expire after a few years. the bill would even open up drilling in the atlantic national wildlife refuge because this tax bill wouldn't be complete unless it helped big oil, too. all of this to saddle the next generation of americans with larger deficits, even larger

debt, something many of my friends on the other side of the aisle have labored against their whole careers. we've heard so many speeches from the other side about deficit reduction. i think my colleagues were sincere. why are they abandoning it now? they all know, every one of our colleagues knows that we could do a lot better job in a tax bill at reducing the deficit than we have here. democrats have from the very beginning told our republican colleagues we want to work with them on tax reform. we want to lower taxes on the middle class. we want to reduce burdens on small businesses. we want to erase the incentives that send jobs overseas and bring jobs back home, and we want to do all these things in a way that doesn't add to the deficit. republicans from the very beginning have said to us we're not interested in working with

you. we're going to draft it ourselves, use reconciliation so we don't need your votes, and you can count for our bill -- you can vote for our bill if you want. that's not bipartisanship with the republican -- that the republican leadership has done. i know there are republicans on the other side who wish we can work together. well, we can. and today at 11:00, i think more than a dozen, certainly a large number of democrats went to the press gallery and said we want to work with our republican colleagues to create a better bill. they came and visited me last night. i encouraged them to do it. this leader, this leader is not going to stand in the way of bipartisan reform that meets the goals that we've talked about, helping the middle class, reducing the deficit, not unduly or in any way aiding the 1%.

bipartisanship and compromise, mr. president, are very possible on tax reform. it's an issue crying out for a bipartisan solution. there are a lot of areas we agree. we have to work to find a middle ground that's acceptable to both parties. i dare say it would be a better bill for the american middle class than the one we're looking at right now. finally, mr. president, and briefly, because i know my colleagues are waiting on the katsas nomination. the d.c. circuit is often called the second most powerful court in the nation because it adjudicates so many highly charged political issues, including cases that deal with the limits of executive power and regulations issued by federal agencies. as examples, major cases on climate regulation, cfpb, gun safety laws in the district of columbia are now before that court. on such a court we should prize

independence, moderation, look wearily at candidates with highly political backgrounds. unfortunately, gregory katsas has been intimately involved in a number of the most partisan and legally dubious executive orders of the current administration. he was involved in the president's controversial travel ban. his decisions to terminate daca, to end transgender service in the military, and to establish an election integrity commission based on the lie that 3.5 million voted illegally in the last election. his tenure and views in the trump administration raise important questions about his independence and moderation, particularly on a court that will likely hear cases related to the very same issues he worked on in the white house. he appears to be another example of the republican majority pushing judges from a political extreme of their party as a way of advancing their interests in lieu of a legislative agenda

which has floundered. i will vote on his familiar noition and urge -- nomination and i urge allle my colleagues to -- all of my colleagues to do the same and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: morning business is closed. under the previous order, the senate will proceed to executive session and resume consideration of the following nomination which the clerk will report. the clerk: nomination, the judiciary, gregory g. katsas of virginia to be united states circuit judge for the district of columbia circuit. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate the previous order, the senate

>> the senate returning, they would a legislative work at 4 p.m. eastern when they consider the u.s. district court nomination for the district of columbia. the confirmation vote plan for 5:30 p.m. eastern and also for negotiations continue on tax reform. floor debate expected to start wednesday. president trump arriving now on capitol hill. take a look at the hallway, expecting possibly to see an and if any lawmakers make remarks we'll bring them here live on c-span2. [background sounds] [background sounds]

>> we will bring you back your life to capitol hill if any lawmakers make remarks or president trump doesn't arrive come come through the hallways here on capitol hill. he is to the setting to meet with republican senators about the tax reform bill. a meeting scheduled at the white house afterwards with democratic leaders was canceled after the president tweeted meeting with the chuck and antedate by open and working. is they want no legal immigrant flood it or country unchecked. we can't rent and want to substantially raise taxes. i don't see video. senate democratic leader chuck schumer tweeted this response given the president doesn't schedule between democrats and the white house, we believe the best path forward is to continue negotiating with our gop counterparts in congress instead rather than going to the white house for a show meeting with asked majority leader and speaker right to meet this afternoon. from house democratic leader

anti-pelosi, she writes widow have any time to waste in addressing the issues that confront us. we are going to continue to go shoot with republican leaders who may be interested in reaching a bipartisan agreement. but c-span producer notes comments from republican leaders, there's a meeting at the white house this afternoon and if democrats want to reach agreement, they will be there. also happening on capitol hill today the senate budget committee meets this afternoon to combine several taxi for provisions approved by of the committees including one from the senate energy committee that would open the arctic national wildlife refuge to expanded oil and gas truly. the budget committee will debate and then vote to report out the merged bill to the full senate. live coverage at 2:30 p.m. eastern over on c-span3. you can watch online at c-span.org, or listen by using the free c-span radio app. white house press secretary sarah sanders likely to be asked about tax reform today with the president on capital talk about

passing legislation. we will have the white house briefing live at 3:00 eastern right here on c-span2. with a busy week ahead for congress, our live coverage include the senate banking committee today considering jerome powell to be the next federal reserve chair and then live today at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span. also today the senate budget committee reviews its tax reform bill. on wednesday the senate h.e.l.p. committee considers the nomination of alex azar to replace tom price as health and human services secretary. live coverage at 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span3. also in wednesday house takes up at the required members of congress and staff to take antiharassment and anti-discrimination training. live coverage of congress this week on the c-span networks, online at c-span.org or with the free c-span radio app.

>> president trump on capitol hill this afternoon to meet with republican senators about tax reform legislation. we are inside the capitol hallways right now, and a look at the preparations as the president is expected to arrive at the u.s. capitol. [inaudible conversations] [background sounds]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> just looking inside u.s. capital. here is a picture from twitter

of the president arrival earlier here to his car pulling up and his motorcade pulling up from cbs as he arrived for lunch with senate republicans again talking about tax reform and tax cut legislation. we will bring you back to the hallways if we can to see the president or lawmakers here at the u.s. capitol. at the white house yesterday first lady melania trump looked over the white house christmas decorations and met with children who would woodcraft projects in different rooms in the first of the white house. this is about 15 minutes. ♪ ♪