mention in your remarks. one of the interesting things about this you've changed your party over time. how do you explain it. >> how do you explain it to people that are trying to unscramble -- >> you can look at my 30 year record, i haven't changed on my convictions. environment, my high standards of clean air and clean water. civil liberties i talked about here. fiscal responsibility for all those bush tax cuts i didn't think they were fiscally responsible. property taxes no one likes to pay, fear of foreign payments, these convictions i've had never changed. >> even when you were a republican, you were progressive? >> absolutely. call myself a liberal republican back then. my record stands up to scrutiny

on that. >> how do you think that's going to sell in the early primary states? >> i have to make that argument. look at my record. >> you talked about russia china. what would be your plan for isis or the affiliated groups. al qaeda? is it possible with them. you have to think it's always possible to start from that premise and i consider myself a student of real politics. you deal with the cards you're dealt. you play the cards you're dealt. sometimes you don't have who you want, where you want them. but you just have to deal with that. and in this age of nuclear weapons, and the fact that pakistan has nuclear weapons of 260 million people it's very very important.

we look at our future generations. >> what are my confessions to isis. what might that look like? >> isis is emerging. it's a phenomenon that's ever changing. i think everyone's surprised what's happening in palmeiro right now. i think we're coming to grips with understanding exactly what these people are and what they want. that was significant, i would say. >> one more question? >> i'm sorry. are we expecting a different kind of campaign? are you going to be doing bbq vans, barnstorming. >> it has to be different. by necessity. >> have a good candidate. energy, the issues, and i trust in viola and new hampshire. to sift through the money.

it's getting -- becoming almost a negative. >> do you think the bush administration lied -- >> i think when he wrote his book talked about humility. >> good question. do you think the bush administration -- >> do you think there's any possibility -- would you be open to negotiating with them? >> i'm just learning -- >> it's early. >> i have to go to a live shot, okay? >> debbie wouldn't tell me -- >> where do you live currently?

>> rhode island. >> where? >> newark, rhode island. i thought you said you lived in canada? >> i lived in canada in the '70s. >> are you okay to wait? >> thanks, bob. live coverage from george mason university school of policy government and international affairs in arlington, virginia. lincoln chaffey, the former u.s. senator and governor of rhode island looking for his candidacy to be president. chaffey served as governor, most recently from 2011 to 2015, first being elected as an independent before joining the democratic party in 2012. we'll have more road to the white house coverage tomorrow former texas governor rick perry is expected to announce his

candidacy for the 2016 presidential nomination, this will be his second run for the white house, following his 2012 candidacy. we'll have him for you live from dallas at 12:30 eastern on c-span 3. this sunday night at 8:00 eastern on first ladies influence and image, we'll look into the personal lives of two first ladies from the 1850s, jane pierce and harriet lane. jane pierce loses her son in a tragic train accident. she does not attend her husband's inauguration and spends much of her time in the white house, writing heartbreaking notes to her son. orphaned at a young age, harriet lane lived with her uncle james buchanan and later becomes hostess to the white house and he becomes president and the first to be called first lady in print.

first ladies, influence and image, examining the private and public lives on the women who influenced the role of first lady. sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 3 and as a compliment to the series, c-span's new book. first ladies, 45 iconic american women. it's available as a hard cover or an ebook through your favorite book store or online book seller. >> with live coverage of the u.s. house on c-span and the senate on c-span 2. here on c-span 3 we compliment that coverage by showing you the most relevant congressional hearings. and then on weekends, c-span 3 is the home to american history tv programs that tell our nation's story including the civil war's 150th anniversary visiting battlefields and key events, american artifacts, touring museums to discover what

artifacts reveal about america's past. history bookshelf with the best known american history writers the presidency looking at the policies and legacies of our nation's commander in chief. top college professors developing into our history's apast. archival government and educational films from the 1930s through the 70s. c-span 3 created by the cable tv industry. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. josh ernest spoke to reporters today about trade promotion authority and the president's strategy against isis and cuba. he was also asked about legal challenges to the health care law. this briefing is an hour.

>> good afternoon, everyone. nice to see you all. don't have any announcements at the top, right to your questions. >> the president is doing this round of local interviews today. it looks like the areas where the interview ss -- i'm wondering if the point of the interviews is to give cover and support to these democrats who are already with him? >> that's a keen political observation. it's true in some instances but not in all of them. some of these are places where there are members of congress who have not yet publicly committed to supporting trade legislation. more broadly, the goal of these interviews is to make the case in these communities that passing the most progressive trade promotion authority that the senate has ever passed would

expand significantly economic opportunity for middle class families, not just in those communitieses, but also all across the country. had a is the case we want to make, that's also the case the president will make in the interview that he conduct ss with npr. this is a broad based case that we're making here. and it's consistent with the case you've heard the president make for weeks. based on the success that we had in convincing nearly a third of the democrats in the senate to support this legislation. that we have the opportunity to make the case, we have to give them a reason to support this bill. >> 17 have said publicly that they are for tpa. >> i don't have an updated whip count for you. i can confirm that the president is continuing to personally involve himself in conversations. with members of the house of

representatives about why they should make the case about why they should support this bill. again, the case that he's making in private is entirely consistent with the argument that he's made publicly about the economic benefits for middle class families associated with this legislation. >> it's washington and abroad, in europe a lot of haters this weekend are saying when he has conversations with these leaders sunday and monday, is he going to be able to assure them that he has the votes in the house to be able to move forward on tpa? >> i think he will make the case that we have built important bipartisan support in the senate for this approach. we're going to continue to it will project confidence that we can produce similar bipartisan

work in the house as well. i don't want to leave you with the impression that that work has been completed. there's important work to be done. what's clear, when we have an opportunity to make the case, the people who areth to keep an open mind about the benefits of this legislation, we've had some success in wing support for the brill. we're going to continue to use that approach to make the case to democrats in the house. >> i know yesterday when you were up here sepp blatter said he would resign, you didn't have a comment on it yesterday, it just happened. >> this is an organization that is responsible for managing the affairs of a support that is closely followed by millions of people across the globe. it's apparent that they benefit from new leadership. this is an opportunity for that organization to try to improve their public image and to make

sure that the actions of that organization are consistent with their mission. >> obviously those will have to be decided. the prosecutors at the department of justice will carry out their work irrespective of any decisions made at fifa. >> how is the white house preparing for the decision on king fur well. are there any contingency plans? >> what we have made clear is that we continue to be confident in the legal case that was presented by the solicitor general before the court earlier this year. >> what is absolutely clear,

republican staffers worked on the bill, there was not a specific intent by members of congress to make the citizens of those state willings that use the federal government ineligible for subsidies. the goal of legislation was to make sure that everyone regardless of what state they lived in, eligible for subsidies based solely on their income. the fact is, this policy as it's been implemented over the last several years, has lower eded health care costs for many people across the country. that's provided significant economic benefits for the country. it's had a positive impact on the fiscal situation in this country. and most importantly, it's made a difference on the lives of millions of people that no longer have to worry, and

they're one illness away from bankruptcy court. >> if the court rules the federal government can provide subsidies, where states won't pay for them. that will undue the significant part of the president's health care legislation. are you so confident in the legal case that there are no contingency plans being considered? >> i -- it is true that we continue to be very confidential in the legal case we have to make, what's also true is that you if the supreme court were to throw the health care system in this country into utter chaos, there would be no easy solutions for solving that problem. principally because it would require -- likely require an act of congress in order to address that situation and we've not seen much of an appetite from republicans in congress to work

constructively to address this question. we've seen many republicans be willing to play politics in a cynical way on this issue but not a lot of constructive engagement to solve problems. so hopefully we're not going to have to -- that will not be eventuality to consider. >> speaking of republicans on the hill. john cornyn said yesterday that the senate may not consider reauthorizing until july which would be past its june 30th deadline. what's the president's response to this? >> we continue to believe that the import export bank does things for the american economy. in terms of supporting american jobs over the last six years the work at the bank has supported 1.3 million private sector jobs inside the united states that's

1 154,000 jobs. that's why we've seen democratic and republican presidents throughout history aggressively advocate for the reauthorization of the import export bank. that includes president reagan who signed legislation reauthorizing the bank and appraised the bank on the occasion of the 50th anniversary back in 1954 when he said that the export import bank contributes in a significant way to our nation's sales. the other thing we have learned, this has been a part of the argument that we have made about the benefits associated with trade legislation is we know that american jobs that are tied to exports on average pay substantially higher than the average american job creating more jobs tied to exports means we need to open opportunities overseas for american goods and services, trade legislation and

a trade agreement in the asia pacific would sfurj that goal. there's work that goes on every day at the export import bank that does that as well. that's why it's important for congress not to prevent the charter from lapsing. fortunately, not every republican agrees with senator cornen. there are republicans who agree with the president's stated position about the benefits of the export import bank. we're hopeful we'll be able to build the bipartisan majority that's necessary to prevent a lapse. >> also notice economy. it seems like you -- the president, the entire administration has been vocal for the past year on numbers on the economy. how much of that has stabilized the progress, et cetera. there's an interesting poll that just comes out today a cnn poll showing that only 40% of those

who responded now think that things are going well in this country. so -- the approval ratings for the president are also down since march, it almost seems like as things stabilize and as that message is hammered out there, you see this strange shift in numbers in the opposite direction. i mean you just can't help but look at that with some interest. what is your take on that, is there anything that you would attribute a shift like that too? >> well presumably cnn has hired highly paid analysts to review the results of the poll. i probably won't get paid as much as the highly paid analysts. but that's exactly right. exactly right. >> it has to be something that you see and you notice, right? >> i would say that i notice it, principally because i asked someone to ask about it today. not because i found it particularly interesting. let me just say as a general matter, the president believes that there is a strong case for

us to make looking at the data, about the significant progress that our economy has made since the worst economic downturn since the great depression. that said, the president believes there is substantially more work that needs to be done. to strengthen our economy and further expand economic opportunity for middle class families. that's why the president is aggressively pursuing a trade legislation that he believes would create jobs and expand economic opportunity. it's why the president continues to believe and you heard me talk about, even in the last couple weeks about how much we would like to see congress take action to reform our tax code and use some of that revenue to invest in infrastructure that we all benefit from. those kinds of significant commitments to infrastructure would create jobs in the short term, would also lay a foundation for economic strength in this country. there are additional things that we can do. and that would have a corresponding impact on the metrics that measure the size and health of our economy.

and presumably that would have the corresponding impact on the president's poll numbers. those numbers are a lot less important. >> one of the largest disapproval numbers you see is in the president's handling of fighting isis. do you think that you think that that contributes to the overall drop or what is your reaction to so many americans at least you know according to this poll saying that that feel that that's an area that's going pretty badly? >> well as we've talked about quite a bit also over the last couple of weeks that there are areas where we've made important progress against isil and areas where we've experienced some setback. and the president is not designing our strategy around this military conflict based on monthly poll numbers but on the national security interests of the united states. that's what's going to continue to guide our strategy and why the president believes it's not in our best interest to reinvade

iraq to solve this problem but he has put in place a strategy that involves working with the international community to support the iraqi security forces as they take the fight to isil in their own country. that's a strategy that we're going to continue to pursue and a strategy that has shown some success but there is more work to be done. >> and obviously from the american public is that it's going quite badly. that has to be something that the administration realizes. >> i think the american public is understandably concerned about isil. the president is too. that's why he has laid out a clear strategy that is consistent with our national security interests to degrade and ultimately destroy them. the president didn't -- you know, obviously protecting the national security interest of the united states is the president's top priority. and he's not going to lose sight of how important that is. >> any reaction to george w.

bush's apruvlgproval rating being higher than the president's right now? >> i don't have a reaction to that. >> congress today a key subcommittee, the appreciation committee in the house is moving to block funding for an expected embassy in havana and i'm wondering if that would hinder an announcement of normalizing relations. >> the president has made clear it is clearly in our interest to try to start normalizing relations between the united states and cuba. and the next logical step in that normalization process is establishing a cuban embassy in the united states and an american embassy in cuba. our diplomats are hard at work in trying to lay the groundwork for an announcement like that. i'm not surprised to hear there

are members of congress who don't agree with that approach. we have heard some from members of congress who believe that if we had just kept the 55-year embargo in place longer we would start to see the kinds of changes that were promised at the beginning of that imposition of the embargo. the president believed that after 55 years we needed to consider something more impactful. we needed a new strategy. and the president continues to be convinced that by greater engagement between our governments and greater engagement between our people we can create economic opportunity for our businesses and we can empower the cuban people to advocate for and protect the basic human rights that are regularly trampled by the cuban government. >> the fourth round of negotiations with cuban officials had not yielded a breakthrough on the nuts and

bolts of things that have to be done. what is the status of the negotiations -- first of all what is the status of the negotiations. >> a couple of weeks ago, the diplomats were at the state department he's. they -- the readout i got from the conversations were that the meetings were productive but not essentially completed. i don't know the current status of those talks. i defer to the state department for an update. >> and i have a question on the rohingya minority in burma. burma just allowed 700 individuals rohingya were floating offshore. they brought them back into the country. i know the president had something to say about this on monday. there continue to be stateless individuals within their own country and the united states, the administration has maintained sanctions on burma. will those sanctions be contingent on the fate of the

rohingya and what pressure will the u.s. apply to give these people rights and citizenship in their own country. >> as it relates to the sanctions on burma i would have to take the question as to what impact those would have. when it comes to pressuring the government in burma the president did that when he traveled to burma and talked about the need for the burmese government to respect the rights and citizens to respect the rights of all the citizens of burma and particularly, to prevent violence between carried out against religious and ethnic minorities in that country and he acknowledged that is a basic responsibility of the central government and expected them to do more to prevent the persecution of the religious and ethnic minorities of the country. i think that is a strong message to the people and government of that country. as it relates to the sanctions we might have on the country let

me follow up. >> is there a concern that persecution continues? >> we continue to be concerned about the human rights situation as it relates to the rohingya in burma. that is a message we have communicated consistently in public and in private to the burmese government. george, did you catch that game last night? the indians? they are going to have to reform the instant replay process. the royals got robbed on that. they did. i know. they did. i just -- >> a less important thing. >> yes. >> with the defeat on tpa undercut the president's standing at the g-7 summit? >> say the first -- would a defeat? >> if he were to tpa. >> i don't think a vote is planned in advance of the summit this weekend and we're not

expecting to lose it. i think the president will be traveling to the g-7. some of whom are involved in negotiations with the united states about a trans-atlantic trade agreement and we're going to continue to make the case to them that we believe that we're going to be able to build bipartisan support for the bill that passed the senate. the president is considering these kinds of talks and pushing for these agreements because it's in the best interest of the middle class. i know there are europeans who know that it would be in the best interest of their middle class as well. there might be an opportunity to seize common ground. that is on a longer track but completing tpa legislation would enhance the likelihood of being able to successfully complete a european trade deal as well.

but much further down the line. dave? >> can you comment on a report in the "washington times" that the clinton foundation collected $26 million in donations in sweden at the same time the swedish government was lobbying the state department under hillary clinton to forego sanctions against swedish companies doing business with iran. was the white house aware of this arrangement? >> i haven't seen that report. we'll get back to you. major? >> josh, a couple things. the taliban have said this morning that it is their understanding and their belief that the taliban five currently in dohar are now free to go. and any attempt by the united states to limit their travel is a violation of international law and the one-year agreement has been lived up to and all reports that that has been extended were false. can you comment? >> the agreement is with qatar

and not the taliban. it's the government of qatar that hat the request of the united states has put conditions on the individuals who were transferred from the prison at guantanamo bay. i can tell you ongoing there are conversations between the united states and qatar ongoing about a longer term resolution of the status of these individuals. the united states is obviously very interested in making sure that steps are taken to mitigate the risk to the united states that is posed by these individuals. >> in this interim procedure are the travel restrictions as they were? >> yes essentially as the talks are ongoing, the restrictive conditions in place over the last year continue to remain in place. >> can you describe what the goal of the administration in the talks going forward. >> the goal is -- go ahead. >> in addition to security. but is the goal to maintain the

restrictions as they are, maybe loosen them ever so slightly, essentially keep them in doha? what is the ultimate goal? >> i can't get into the substance of the requirement -- >> i understand the negotiations are -- a lot of variables there and factors equities, stake holders, et cetera et cetera. what's the goal? >> the reason it's hard to talk about the goal is because the restrictive conditions in place are not something we talk about in detail publicly. when it comes to the goal it really is making sure that there are measures in place to protect the american people and the united states and our interests. and what exactly -- what exact form those restrictions take is something that we'll discuss with the qataris but not be able to discuss publicly even