contempt. now this was -- this is not hardly a rational basis for a negotiation, nor is it a reasonable attempt at turning over the documents that we've been asking for. and listen, i've been heavily involved in this now for months. making sure that the t's were crossed. the i's were dotted and what we were asking for was reasonable. i understand there's a criminal investigation going on. i don't want to do anything that would interrupt that criminal investigation. but the documents as an example relating to why they sent the letter up on february 4th of last year, why it took them ten months to retract that letter. what those deliberations are have nothing to do with a criminal trial. and so those documents i think are important for the truth to

come out. >> i know what the attorney general said when he came to the meeting on wednesday afternoon. there seems to be some out there that -- >> well, i think more and more members understand all of the facts as i know them and as chairman issa knows them and the rest of the leadership team, this was done with plenty of deliberation. and plenty of time for the administration to work with us to resolve this issue. >> grover for kwis is coming up here this afternoon to talk to your members about the pledge. some of your republican challengers that your party supports won't sign the pledge. lindsay graham says he thinks your party's position is going to shift and you'll support closing some leap holes is the pledge not as porn important as it used to be. >> norquist will come up here

and he'll have a conversation about it. the american people understand that raises taxes in this economy is the wrong thing to do if we're serious about creating jobs. we're going to move our extension next month. we're going to outline our principals for tax reform. listen, i've been around the political process for a long time. i've never voted to raise taxes. but we've got a big job to do. i'm not interested in raising taxes. but they can discuss whether loophole closes or tax increase -- if you take a seat, i'll answer your question. >> following up on that, i know that you believe that spending is the problem. given that some members of your party are showing om reluctant to shine the pledge, do you think -- you have shown some willingness to raise tax revenues as part of an effort to

bring down the debt. do you feel that more members of your party are copping around to that view and do you think that will make finding common ground on this issue easier? >> in negotiations with the president i have additional revenues on the table. revenues out of economic growth. revenues out of more efficient tax system. revenues out of what i call tnt cost and having certainty about what the tax code looks like. listen, i do believe that there's a way to resolve it. but at this point, giving this government more revenue would be like giving a cocaine addict what parts to quit more cocaine. we have to have controls on spending. we have to deal with the entitlement crazes that's threatening the existence of these programs. so that conversation will continue well into next year. >> do you believe that you might

distract from your job's agenda? you began talking about jobs today. many people are saying this is getting you off message. >> our focus has been on jobs. but i understand that members of congress take an oath of office to uphold and defend the constitution and the laws of the united states of america. when those laws are broken, congress has a responsibility to provide oversight of the executive branch. we are -- we are pursuing our legitimate concerns about making sure that the american people know the truth behind fast and furious and the death of randall terry. >> if there are further negotiations -- >> i do believe that chairman issa has a much better handle on the types of documents that are needed. i'll do everything to help facilitate a conversation. but i do believe it's chairman issa's responsibility and he's

in a much better position to understand exactly what documents that he needs. >> mr. speaker, there's a lot of concern that the fiscal split doesn't just take effect on january 1st. particularly in the defense community there's going to be some decisions made or contracts slowed down and that could affect the economy this fall. are you committed to turning off the sequester before the election? >> we've done everything we can to try to replace the sequester. why the house acted last month. moved the bill to the senate to make sure that these reductions in force which are coming and will come before the first of the year don't happen because i'm concerned that you can't wait, the department of defense can't wait until january 2nd and just flip a switch and find $50 billion worth of savings next year. so i'm convinced that we're going to see -- we're going to

see pink slips coming month after month as we get up to january 2nd if the sequester is not replaced. it's time for the senate to act. and by the way, we've not heard anything out of the senate. we've not heard anything out of the president. maybe instead of campaigning every day, he could be concerned about the security of the american people and concerned about the job picture in our country by working with the congress to make sure that this sequester does not go into effect. >> grover norquist since a relevant person? >> coming up in a half-hour or so we'll take you live to the white house. president obama is expected to give remarks urging congress to pass legislation avoiding a doubling of student loan interest rates, which is set to happen on july 1st. we'll have live coverage from the white house coming up at 1:40 eastern here on c-span3. next up, though, senate democrats who just wrapped up their briefing on capitol hill,

majority leader reid talked about grover norquist's visit to capitol hill today. they also touched on the resignation of commerce secretary john bryson. this is 20 minutes. >> i was out of the floor to make sure it turned out okay so search light would be okay. it dealt with rural water systems and there is a water system in search light. i felt that searchlight shouldn't be treated any different than denver or albuquerque or new york city or whatever. so sorry to be late. the leader of the republican part is up here today on the hill. but you may be surprised to learn that it's not mitt romney, it's not john boehner and it's not mitch mcconnell. you know who it is. it's grover norquist. nearly every republican in congress has signed grover's pledge. mitch mcconnell signed it.

mitt romney has signed it. when romney was asked if he would support a deficit reduction plan that had 90% in cuts, 10% revenue, he said, no. he wouldn't support it. he would reject the deal. unfortunately all the republicans on grover's list are at odds with the american people. 3/4 of americans support a balanced deficit reduction package that cuts spending while asking millionaires and corporations to pay their fair share. the support really goes across all the political spectrum. democrats, independents even republicans agree. the only republicans who aren't on board are the ones here in washington instead of supporting a balanced deficit plan, republicans in congress all jumped on board with the ryan plan. this throws a monkey wrench into the relationship with grover, if you really think it through. the report released yesterday by the joint economic committee

shows the ryan plan would raise taxes on mitd class americans and raise it a lot. the ryan plan would pay for the $10 trillion in tax cuts that benefit millionaires by getting rid of hoop loopholes. the trouble is many of these so call hoop loyals are popular dedications and they're -- i'm sorry, deductions and credits that benefit the middle class. deductions that help families save for retirement, pay their health care premiums and purchase homes. so to lower tax rates for the wealthiest few, paul ryan and mitt romney would actually raise taxes on the middle class. while a family making a million dollars a year would see their taxes drop by almost $300,000 under the romney plan, a family making $50,000 would see their taxes go up by more than $1300. so republicans who are enthralled with the norquist pledge have a question to answer, doesn't the ryan, romney

scheme violate the norquist pledge? grover's on capitol hill today. i would hope that someone would ask him that question and ask about mitt romney who wants to come here and work things out when he wouldn't go for a 90/10 person deal. that doesn't seem good to me. but that's grover's demand and that's what's happening. senator durbin. >> i attended a lot of meetings on deficit reduction and met with a lot of republicans with very few exceptions. they've told me the biggest problem is the pledge with grover norquist. if you watch "60 minutes", hawaii has the pledges framed in his office. he points to them as if he's a scalp of some republican congressman or senator that he wants to show off. if anybody crosses him, he knows the whole gang is going to come down hard on him. the problem is none of us have take a pledge to anything other than to the constitution when it

comes to service in the senate and house. those who think that grover norquist are equal to that pledge have lost sight of the notion of public service. if you're serious about ending this session in positive fashion, all the work is going to go for naught if the house republicans particularly the tea party republicans wait for the thumbs up from grover norquist. the bottom line is we have serious issues facing this country right now and at the end of the year to resolve those issues in a favorable way it means that both sides have to be willing to give these ironclad pledges to people like grover norquist make it impossible to govern this country responsibly. >> senator schumer. >> we know one thing you cannot solve our fiscal problems, you cannot avoid the fiscal cliff if you sign grover norquist's pledge. grover norquist and solving our fiscal problems are opposite poll poles. today norquist smaking house

calls around capitol hill. in an hour or so he's scheduled to visit longworth office building to offer tutorials to house republicans on what his tax pledge means for the fiscal cliff negotiations later this year. now the blitz he's doing is a sign of weakness. his relevance has been openly questioned for the first time lately. and he's in full damage control mode. well, he has an uphill climb. more and more republicans are beginning to decide they don't care what he thinks. more and more republicans are realizing that to solve our nation's fiscal problems they cannot be part of grover norquist's army. a couple of weeks ago, lindsay graham said he had crossed the rubicon on the need for revenues and deficit deal and urged his fellow republicans to join him in putting the need for a grand bargain ahead of the pledge. tom coburn never one to shy away

from a fight with norquist said this week in an interview quote, the well to do are okay paying some more tax as long as the taxes are going to pay down the debt not going go grow the government, unquote. on those strong words from coburn national review said, that kind of talk may not please grover norquist, the president of americans for tax reform, but coburn doesn't care. other republicans are deciding they don't care about norquist either. jeb bush as respected a figure -- jeb bush as respected a figure that exists right now in the modern republican party decided to take him on in a very high profile way. this was a big deal. jeb bush is a heavy weight on the side of those republicans who want reform. who want fiscal responsibility. jeb may run for president in four years. many on the other side wanted him to run this time. he dismissed the norquist

pledge. and basically declared grover norquist to be a gnat that other republicans should just brush away. joe scarborough said in a fight between jeb bush and grover norquist quote, jeb bush's republican party one that values compromise over conflict is quote, the party of the future. so we're already seeing glimpses of that future on the republican side. and thank god. this week many of us joined another of those bipartisan fiscal briefings that our friends mark warner and lamar alexander have been organizing. among republicans in that room there is talk of tax pledges, and a shared desire to solve our nation's big challenges. the republican house is still far from getting its act together, but they're a good bipartisan vibes all around the senate these days. we're about to pass a major farm bill. this is just the latest big breakthrough after a highway bill, postal reform, violence

against women act and the fda bill with each of these accomplishments, we're building up a reserve of trust and good will that will help during the big picture negotiations coming at the end of the year. grover norquist is the problem around here. and bipartisanship in the senate is the solution. >> well as you've all witnessed here this week in the senate, bipartisan agreement is possible. in fact, i am joining with senator mccain shortly on a bipartisan compromise that will make sure that congress gets reports on the impact of all aspects of se quest ration both defense and nondefense. it is an amendment that calls for the examination of the impact of not only the cuts to the defense department, but the painful cuts to education and food safety and border patrol and many of the programs that middle class families and the most vulnerable americans depend

on. i think this is a strong sign that both sides understand the pain that squooes ration would inflict. that both sides believe it is a terrible way to cut spending. my hope is na it will help show both sides we can and must work together to get a balanced and bipartisan deal required to replace the automatic cuts responsibly and fairly. but where there are glimmers of hope and clear signs of bipartisanship here in the senate, there's just more of the same in the house. in fact, this week instead of working on a passing a transportation jobs bill that passed the senate with 74 votes or b, taking up bipartisan legislation to protect vulnerable women that passed here with 68 votes, or c, working with us to signal support on the job creating farm bill we are working to complete right now, the house republicans went with d, none of the above.

instead they decided to create partisan political theater and today as the senate moves together, house republicans are retreating even further into their corner apparently it's time for them to talk it over with their coach. so in a private reading with house republicans, grover norquist is working to renew the pledge. to once again remind house republicans he is watching and special interests come first. to hold over them the same piece of paper that deadlocked the supercommittee and brought us to this point. i really hope this republicans in the house have the strength to stand up to these heavy handed tactics to realize this is a bipartisan problem that requires a bipartisan solution. we've seen evidence today that there are those in the senate that understand that fact. and i hope that message reaches over to the house and even into the room with mr. norquist. >> if someone would be kind enough to let he know what's

going on on the floor. we're cramped for time. >> can you give us an update on the transportation bill? i understand there's been progress made in the negotiations, but time is short. will you need at least a short extension? >> i don't think we'll need an extension. i hope not. now i can't guarantee anyone here we're going to get a highway bill. we're certainly in much better shape than we were 24 hours ago. i think it says a lot when we had a vote of 384 out of the house last night that of course is bipartisan we couldn't get that money numbers fit weren't bipartisan to say they wanted a deal by tomorrow. mow i've spoken to senator boxer several times. and there's significant progress being made. we hope that we can get this over the finish line. it would be wonderful for the country. it really, really would be and we're trying. yes. >> did president obama nominate a new commerce secretary and did you hold a vote before november?

>> that's a very unfortunate thing that secretary bryson got sick. he was so anxious to have the job as you know it took him a while to get it approved because the republicans were holding him up. i would hope that the president could get a consensus nominee forward and we could get it done. the commerce department is important and it shouldn't be without someone leading that important agency. >> what kind of movement can you tell us about on the progress on the student loan issue? and what papers are still on the table? >> i know this is very unlike us, like the highway bill, we have great hope that we can get that done. i think we're well down the road. you heard that the republican leaders both boehner and mcconnell said one will get done. it's easy to say that, but this stage it appears that they are

compromising just as we are and hope we can get something done. >> two minutes left. >> one of the possible scenarios when the support rules on the affordable care act is they will strike down the mandate which is the part of the act that's not popular with the public. the other stuff is really popular. how will -- if that happens, how will democrats here justify the policy of leaving preexisting conditions and donut hole and all the goodies that people like on the table if the mandate goes. that's not a tenable policy. who you will you justify leaving the good stuff in place if the bad stuff goes? >> that's a matter of opinion whether anything is bads. the reason we have that in there is so people can have the same nurns that i have and the rest of other federal employees. i'm not going to stand here in front of you and speculate as to what would happen if the support did this or that. we're waiting for their opinion. we're ready to move until the supreme court makes a decision

public. but we are not here going to speculate what they're going to do. it would be unfair to the supreme court and unfair to the president and i think the whole senate. >> pardon me? >> farm bill? >> i think we can get that done. we have seven or eight more minutes. coming up in about 20 minutes or so on c-span, we will take you live to the white house. president obama is expected to talk this afternoon about the student interest rates. the loan rates going up doubling by july 1st. he's calling on congress to do something before the doubling of those rates.

we may hear more also from the president about the resignation of john bryson, the commerce secretary who announced his resignation earlier today. we'll have live coverage coming in at 1:40 eastern here on c-span3. more live coverage later today. book tv, peter edelman the author of the book "so rich, so poor." which talks about why our economy produces great wealth and great poverty at the same time. he's in washington this evening. we'll have it live at 6:30 eastern on book tv.org. this weekend on afterwards, katey pavlitsch details fast and furious. >> this is something that was wiped under the rug and kept from the american people and the mexican people as well. there are hundreds of faceless innocent mexican citizens who have been murdered as a result of this. but the only thing that we knew outside of the government program was that guns from american gun dealers were going into mexico and causing all these problems with the cartel

when really the government was sanctioning these sales and sending them into mexico. >> she's interviewed by national journal white house correspondent major garrett sunday night at 9:00. part of book tv this weekend on c-span2. president obama coming up at 1:40 eastern. until then some reaction on yesterday's vote on contempt movements on the attorney general. >> and we're pleased to have join us now representative nicky songas from massachusetts. if we could start with what we were talking with our viewers about earlier this morning that's the house oversight vote -- committee's vote on holding eric holder in con tempt. what are your thoughts about that? >> well, i think the policy itself it's been called the fast and furious policy was ill

advised whether it was put in place under president bush and certainly part of his administration and as ill advised under the administration of president obama. and has led to a tragic consequence with a loss of a border patrol's life. i think there's a very appropriate role for congressional oversight. and i also think there needs to be some accountability which we have seen with the firing of some of those who were held responsible. i think our attorney general has released about 7600 pages of documents. the fight really is over a narrow band of documents around which he has said and i think rightly so that there is very privileged information there that could compromise ongoing investigations. so in terms of the contempt vote itself, i have yet to see the resolution and i'll be looking at it before i make up my -- make a decision. i'm sad it's come to this. i think there was a way forward

that didn't necessarily have to lead to this point. and when you look at what else we're doing or not doing in congress, we have a transportation bill whose authorization is about to expire. student loan rate's about to double for millions of american students. i think those are the things we really should be dealing with. >> and one other issue of the day that i wanted to bring up potentially the supreme court could rule today on health care. >> my view of this was i was a strong supporter of health care reform coming from massachusetts under governor romney's administration we created the template for the law that was enacted. the goal really was multipronged to create access to health insurance for the millions of uninsured americans who saw great success in that with massachusetts. we know we have to deal with the rising cost of health care if we don't do that, it doesn't matter who's paying for it. it's not supportable over time and there are many elements of the accountable care act that

would do that. we have many americans who seek out and are given health care, but because they're not insured it's left to government and the rest of us to pay for that coverage. and we want some important insurance reforms. so my view is does the congress have a rational basis for moving ahead and dealing with it as it did in this way? my hope is that the supreme court will defer to the role of congress and to the political process that if the political process should resolve this and not our supreme court. >> if the supreme court doesn't rule like you suggest, do the democrats in the house have a plan b? >> i don't know if we have a plan b. i think we're all in our way trying to weigh the process forward. much remains to be seen as to what contactually they do. whether or not they deal with the individual mandate or look more broadly at the entire piece of legislation. i think we have to wait to see

what the outcome is. my hope really is that the supreme court defers to the political process and the role of congress and the legitimacy of the issues it was trying to deal with and address nationally. >> you're a member of the armed services committee. before we got started on the program here, you mentioned that you traveled to afghanistan. how many times have you been there? i know laura bush was very active on the role of women in afghanistan, was that one of your issues as well? >> i went there four times. i went soon after being elected to congress and have seen quite a change over the course of those four visits. my last two visits were really with the focus on visiting with our women who are serving in combat or in support roles, but given the nature of these wars really necessarily put them in harm's way virtually at all times. but also to meet with afghan women who have benefitted from our presence there and our investment in education and

health care in particular. and so i'm a strong supporter of the timetable the president has put in place. i actually would support a more aggressive timetable. but i am very concerned that we don't walk away from the gains for women and children. we visited a school in a small village close to the pakistan border where 1,000 young girls cycle through that school in a given day. we were able to visit with some older students. the school went the full gamut. some older students, we asked these young girls who would you like to do? i want to 3 be a lawyer. i want to be a doctor. i want to be a journal itself. i want to be a teacher. it didn't take much to raise the sight lines once you expose young people and young women to education. i remain very committed in supportive and hold our administration's feet to the fire that as we negotiate a way out that we also are very

supportive of the gains we maid for women and we hold the government after kabul's feet to the fire as well. >> there's a report about congress not allowing another brack round to happen. is that a correct report and do you agree with that? >> i'm on the armed services committee. we did not authorize a brack process. the president has yet to introduce legislation that would create that process. and coming from massachusetts we are not home to many base, but we are home to one that has a very unique capability because of its proximity to many research and development facilities, extraordinary universities that partner with it, this is hanson air force base. as we look at the cyber security challenges we have, that base is uniquely positioned to help respond to that challenge. i'm a strong advocate for the particular base that we're so proud of in massachusetts. but we know that the brack process is coming. that as part