and we'll leave this here. we have the state of american democracy under the trump

administration. this is live coverage on c-span3. >> good morning, everyone. i am the president and ceo -- the american people agree on at least one thing. that they are fed up with the status quo here in washington. this status quo's maintained by a system in which many special interests have placed a strangle-hold on the legislators. day after day we hear about how this republican congress and the trump administration are cutting special deals for their donors over the needs of the american people. donald trump didn't drain top swamp, his swamp is now drowning our government. the american people understand that the corrupting influence of big money in our government leads to policies which

short-change the interest of hard-working families when it comes to health care, tax laws or basic civil rights. in fact, the recent poll conducted by -- found that they want lawmakers the to reduce their role in politics. that's why cap action is proud to support a series of groundbreaking steps congressional democrats have recently proposed to ensure that our political system works on behalf of the people once again. in may democrats in both chambers of congress came together to announce a bold set of proposals called a better deal for our democracy. and just a few weeks ago, democrats in the house introduced the by the people resolution, which would transform these reforms into concrete legislative action. the better deal for our democracy is captured in their

new resolution centers around three categories of strong and clear solutions for creating a more responsive and accountable government. first, it would prepare the broken campaign finance system and stop special interests and wealthy donors from spending unlimited amounts of secret money in our elections. second, it would enact tough ethics laws including measures to limit the power of lobbyists and close the revolving door between capitol hill and k street. and to expand earning votes across the the nation. this is critical to renewing the strength of our democracy. that's why we are thrilled for us to have this event today. i will have a conversation with leader pelosi. and then my colleague will have a conversation with a few members of congress who have been leading this fight.

we're all familiar with the many accomplishments of leader pelosi and all she's achieved in her remarkable career. she's the first woman in history to serve as speaker of the house. and she is, in many ways, the person in congress most responsible for passing the affordable care act and defending it now. leader pelosi has also fought tirelessly to curb the influence of money and politics to expand voting rights and to bring greater accountable to our government. and i will just say that i have witnessed her firsthand taking bold and courageous steps, steps she knew would be difficult and that would be unpopular for the american people. so i am thrilled to welcome leader pelosi to the stage.

>> thank you so much for being here and for your leadership of this and so many other important -- i actually would like to start off on some of the news that is happening. obviously, on last friday, robert mueller and the department of justice issued a series of indictments around the -- what happened in election tampering. as we think through voter integrity, we have a situation now in which the president is meeting with -- >> sorry. >> no problem.

>> the president of the united states is meeting with russian leader vladimir putin. russia just was -- several russian officials were just indicted. and yet it seems the president did not mention this. as people worry about our election integrity, do you have any comments or reactions to the so-called summit happening right now? >> well, thank you very much for the invitation to be here. it gives me the opportunity to once again as i say over and over again, say thank you for being the intellectual research we have on what has happened and suggestions and initiatives for the future. so thank you. thank you so much for your leadership. and that is an applause line. the connection between the president sitting there and speaking with vladimir putin

practically tolerating what he had to say or maybe not was, i think, very indicative. the president, in my view, was afraid to mention a subject at hand. 12 indictments against people connected to the intelligence community in russia and to try to disrupt our election. so from the standpoint of that conversation, i think the president was afraid to bring it up. we know he wasn't being diplomatic. and it begs the question, what does vladimir putin -- what do the russians have on donald trump personally, politically and financially that he should behave in such a manner? and in doing so, him undermining our allies and really with the policy of the statements and the tweets he's making, blame america first.

we just don't like that policy. we'll support the leader's meeting, finding common ground, that's always a good thing. i just don't think it is legitimate if you are not going to face the realities there. and the reality is that the russian government was a party to the disruption, those associated with the russian government, were a party to disruption of our government, out of our democracy and our commitment is about people understanding that they vote and that everyone who is eligible to vote will vote, that their vote will be cast and there should be no suppression of the vote by other kinds of -- we know they are suppressing it enough on the republican side, but no suppression of the vote about tax excuse by a foreign government. >> thank you. thank you so much. i want to turn back to the

better deal for our democracy. and just ask you broadly why you think this series of policies is important. >> thank you. well, we all know it's important because it's about our democracy. and our democracy is about everybody believing that his or her vote counts. i'm very proud of the work of john banes and his task force he's put together. and you'll hear more from him in the panel. and the work that terry soule has been doing to fight voter suppression. which again, as i said to my colleagues, if and chen you leave this earth, and if and when you go to heaven and see our founders, are you grow i think to say to them, i did everything i could to suppress the vote? because that's what they're doing, right, terry? and then you'll hear from congresswoman about the policy implications and all that.

but here's the important thing about this, big money in politics, big dark money in politics is perhaps the biggest vote suppresser for the following reasons. this money comes in, sufficieoc the airwaves with misrepresentations, nothing to do with truths or anything, not a policy to advocate but a mischaracterization that they want to present. so what happens? people -- it's confusing on both houses and that's exactly what we have on both of our houses. we think it's important to take this to a different place, to show the difference between democrats and republicans, but hopefully to bring the republicans along, overturn citizens united and power small donors. john banes will go into more detail on that.

there's a cynicism on the role of politic that is is undermining our democracy. perhaps we can go more into that if you wish, but again, this is important because that money in politics comes at the expense of the air our children breathe, the water they drink, the fairness in the workplace and rights for workers, be a collective bargaining safety, et cetera, pensions, it comes at the expense of a fairness, again, raising the minimum wage, it comes at the expense of climate, the whole idea of the fossil fuel industry controlling for decades what is happening. the biggest generational challenge, the biggest challenge to our generation is to pass it on in a responsible way.

any subject you can make is effective. need i say guns? that the republicans in congress are totally in the pocket of the national rifle association and other gun lobbyists. so whether it is our safety, whether it is fair nps our economy, whether it is air and water that our children breathe. you name the subject. if you want me to go into the tax bill and budget and the rest of that, i will. >> i was going to ask about the tax bill. i think the tax bill is a good example. it's the last -- it's the last major piece of legislation that went through both houses. and i think what was interesting about the tax bill is that it was like so out in the open. and there is so much reporting about how essentially there are provisions passed in the bill, provisions most people didn't really know about, particularly the people who voted in favor of the bill, that were put in at the request of one donor or

another donor to the house ways and means committee, or the finance staff members, so i think if you could -- that's sort of a quintessential example of the issue that we're talking about, which is at the heart of this, people feel like the congress doesn't represent their voices. it represents their donor's voices. and if you have a sense of how the tax -- what happened with the tax bill and how this legislation would insure or the series of legislations would insure that people's voices trump donors voices. >> well, thank you for that. because nothing has more clarity in that when we get to a subject that relates to the budget. how we attract funds and how we spend funds. then we go back to the kind introduction that you gave me a lot of credit for passing the affordable care act. i accept that on behalf of my

colleagues, democratic colleagues, that had the courage to take the vote intellect to help write the bill and all that. but in addition to that, the reason we were able to win was because of outside mobilization. outsidemobilization. outside mobilization. and on the features of the republican budget, repeal the affordable care act and in the tax bill are assaults on the affordable care act. and in order to -- and to defeat the repeal, there were 10,000 meetings held by groups, lobbyists, you name any group, hcam, you all were involved in some of these, whether it was labor unions or patient groups and the rest, people with pre-existing medical -- 10,000 meetings, press conferences, sit-ins, marches, you name it, one form or another. so, i want us in this discussion to be very, very hopeful that we can change this situation about

money and politics. and the groups that we work with say the argument against the tax bill that resonates and the people they get to call in and the rest is what it does to the budget. it's grossly unfair. 83% going to the top 1%. let me just reference what you said. chris collins said, my donors are basically saying, get it done or don't ever call me again. lindsey graham said the financial contributions will stop if the tax bill doesn't -- if the tax scam -- he didn't say tax came, i'm saying tax scam -- fails. mulvaney says pe have hierarchy in my office. if you never gave money, i won't talk to you. if you gave money, i might talk to you. he gave that at the american bankers association conference. i just wanted to read it so you knew i was exactly quoting them.

but what the grassroots groups said that really resonates with them and what we know to be so is how it impacts the budget. so the president's budget comes out, cutting over trillion dollars in medicaid, half a trillion in medicare. social security, disabilities benefits, food stamps, nutrition programs, education. especially if you're a senior where seniors seem to be -- you know, have voted a senior way, they're going after your medicare. they have said it should wither on the vine. now they have the perfect excuse. oh, my gosh, we have over $2 trillion deficit generated by the tax bill. how are we going to reduce the national -- how are we going to mitigate for that? we're going to cut medicare, medicaid and that. so, again, these are issues that strike to the financial security

of america's working families. and that's what we're here to ensure that we work for that. and that is the unifying force in our democratic party. so, right now right now in the interest of the financial stability of america's working families, we want to raise the minimum wage. money and politics weighs in against that. we want to ensure people with pre-existing medical conditions still maintain that benefit. of course, money and politics, and it's in their tax bill, the elimination of that. and that's in the courts now. so it is -- again, if there were one thing this election could remedy, it would to win the house for the democrats -- not to get political, but to win the house for the democratings, and the governors and state legislators because what's at stake is the financial stability of america's families.

cost of prescription drugs, obscene. cuts in medicaid and medicare. medicaid pays a lot of the long-term health care for our seniors, but an assault on medicare. and elimination of the benefit of a pre-existing condition not being a barrier to you getting health care. so, money weighs in on all of those things. take any subject. the reform of dodd/frank. now they go after that every day. every day they go after the degradation, they go to degrade the environment. oh, pruitt, he was a disgrace with his ethical behavior. but he was a bigger disgrace for what he was doing to the air our children breathe and the water they drink. and it was blatant. and he was good at it. he was very effective at being a violator of the obligation we have to our children. so, lincoln, our great

president, he said, and despite what -- well, never mind. i won't go into that. lincoln, he said, public sentiment is everything. with it you can accomplish almost anything. without it, practically nothing. in effect. so, for public sentiment to weigh in, people have to know. and people seem to know very clearly that there's a problem here. they have to know very clearly that there is a solution here. and this is a tipping point. in is a time with positive agenda, that john sarbanes will present, with the description of what is happening, violating our civil rights and voting rights, that terry will present, that impacts who we are as a humanity. i say one thing. the sermon yesterday in church was very interesting to me. maybe i'll say two things.

that was the priest said he talked about fairness and that. and he said -- he quoted the founder of the jesuits, st. ignatius loyola and saying he cautioned people against, if you get money, he said, if you get money, then you get prideful. and then you get more prideful and you want more money and that's what the thrust is. so, there is a path that is about getting money and pride, and that's success. and he said some of those same people, he used this word, which i would hesitate to use in our arena, but he used this word -- who are enemies of our humanity. enemies of our humanity. and he talked about people who are trying to raise their families, live their lives and all the rest of that, and have a sense of humility about what

their possibilities are. and that reminded me of toinby, when he wrote about civilizations, he said there are two things that can happen. he said, you can have a governing elite. he called it the minority. a creative minority of these governing people, who would be the creative for the flowering of the society. that people would succeed. and that would be what their vision was for their society. and then there was the exploiting minority. and if they had the governance, they were about power, special interests and money. and when those two existed in the same society, it caused a schism of the political soul of the country. does that sound familiar to you? does that sound familiar?

st. ignatius loyola, tinby and, just one more, st. agustin. st. agustin said 17 centuries ago, any government that doesn't promote justice is just a bunch of thieves. and benedict who put that in his first guide of love, he went on to say, sometimes it's hard for everybody to agree in defining justice, but in doing so, you must be aware of the dazzling blindness of money and special interest and power. here we are at this pivotal point of our humanity, this isn't even democrats or republicans, it's about fairness and justice about what our founders sacrificed everything for. so, i do -- i'm so optimistic that as we go forward into the

elections, of course to win so we can pass bills that do what is being suggestsuggested, but change the whole dynamic in the country so that republicans are on notice that they have to support this, too. >> great. [ applause ] >> thank you. we have some questions from social media that i'll go to. i'll just ask one question on the topic today. you talked about being -- about public sentiment and optimism about how people are engaged, engaged in health care and defending the affordable care act, engaged in the fights we're having day to day. there was a report on pro voter systems that increase voter participation in our elections. you know, theatoretically they e good at ensuring people's vote, i know people have different

views of that, but this is access to the franchise as a critical element of the series of proposals in the better deal. i would love for you to touch on, perhaps, that issue, which is -- as i travel the country, i do find people worried about voter suppression. we have found with tactics that would actually expand the franchise, millions more people would be participating. so, how central is the issue of access to the vote and your sense of this -- this important series of bills that will improve people's confidence in government itself? >> well, access to the vote is central to a democracy. and i know that terry will be talking about some of this in terms of voting rights and voter suppression and the rest of that. but i do want to say that,

again, reducing the role of money is really important in all of this. but there's -- there are also some legislation that we can -- imagine after all these years they still have not passed the voting rights act that would correct some of what the supreme court did. they haven't done that. i want to get back to the point at the end -- or for the other point. what we have done, which i'm very, very proud of, as you know, we have our effort to win the house and the role of just supporting the candidates is something changing -- support the candidate, support the committee and that so that we're the point of the spear so we can make this happen. in addition to that, one of our initiatives is the national democratic redistricting committee headed by eric holder. and that is a committee that terry mcauliffe and i and president obama put together, and eric being part of that, now

he's taking the lead. this is about litigation in the courts. it's about initiatives on the ballot. it's about ending suppression in many different ways by taking inventory and having solutions. and it's about doing so in a way that has attracted so many people so help. certainly financially, but that's not the point. the point is many lawyers from arnold the country and other people around the country to be there, knowing their region specifically to fight in this fight. it's very important. as you said, all around the country i talk about our vision, better jobs, better pay, health care, this, that and the other. necessity say, what about the machines? what about the machines? and that is a fear people have. well, we have to address that. that's one thing i'm

disappointed the republicans did not join us sufficientlily when we wanted to send the letter to -- after we realized this was all happening with the russians and the rest, i knew early because they had done the dccc. we knew in june, and i said that at the democratic convention, i'm not telling you anything i know from classified information. this is from our experience, the russians are disrupting our election. in any event, when it came further brought to the attention of the leadership of the congress by the director of national intelligence, director of the cia, the secretary of hh -- of homeland security, et cetera, and others, that this is happening, this is, say, late summer, we -- harry reid and i proposed a letter to the -- those who run the voting.

frequently secretaries of state, sometimes a different entity in the state saying, these are the resources, intellectual, political, financial, that are available to you to help protect. but we wanted to also add we wanted to declare the electoral system critical infrastructure. this is very important. not only requewould the republi not go along with that, they made us -- in order to send the letter because we thought we had to alert the entities in the state, in order to send the letter, they made us say in the letter, this is not to be interrupted as declaring the electoral system critical infrastructure. that's more on the subject than you ever wanted to know, but it was very, very important. >> we really care about that a lot. >> very, very important. because they have resisted. the republicans in congress had resisted the very inoculation against what the republicans

were doing that we could have done, not to mention i think the other day they had their first meeting, which was really insufficient, but the first hearing on this subject in a year and a half since it was officially declared as the consensus of the intelligence community this has happened. you see the dni's statement, coates' statement over the weekend, i don't have them with me, but they were very, very strong about what the russians have done and are doing in our elections. >> thank you. we have time for one question from social media. on facebook, kathy stressed the importance of appealing to millenials when talking about restoring our democracy. we know many younger americans feel they're powerless to change the culture of corruption and their voices aren't heard. we're also seeing powerful movements now being led by young people, like the march for our lives. what are some ways we should talk about democracy reform issues with young americans, especially when linking

democracy to reform policy issues, just as you've done? reform policy issues they care about. >> well, thank you. the question is about how we would talk to them, but the question of how we have dealt with this is how we are listening to them. we have our future form led by eric swalwell millenials. we have millenials in congress, happily, and we'll get many more in this election. they've gone to maybe 50, 60 venues around the country, whether it's inner city, rural area, college campus, wherever young people are to listen, to listen to what their concerns are. you know what some of them might be about the cost of college, are they going to get a job climate change, wall street, money, politics, those kind of things, but to hear it from net neutrality, to hear it from

them. they see clearly, we share with them the thought, there was a direct connection of money in politics to the policies that come forth in the congress. so, we have to make it clear -- we have to make it clear to them that we're on a different page. they say paint us all with the same brush, but we're in a different place. but the future belongs to young people. and they all have a responsibility -- i say that as a mother and grandmother -- a responsibility to take charge of it. and everything is a conversation unless it is tied to the vote. so, while we never are satisfied -- you know, as i was an advocate before i was in congress to chair the california democratic party, we were always dissatisfied, persistent, relentless, nothing congress could do could be good enough for us because we were the vips, the volunteers in politics, the most important people.

but the fact is, you have to win yord to make the difference. and i think in this election, like no other, the mobilization is so powerful, so driven from the outside. i say the same thing about the women who march. they marched and now they're running. the young people marching for their lives and now registering voters. people are translating it into the political solution. and that's about the vote. so, get -- so, vote, win, and then engage in the discussion about what the priorities are. but you cannot -- we have a saying -- in fact, we have it printed on our shirts and everything else. we don't agonize, we organize. just organize around that money and politics issue is a very powerful issue. it must happen, it will happen, but young people will be dispositive of how the election

turns out. seniors will vote. every poll we see they're still -- young people will make the difference in all of this. you know what, because they see what it means to their future. again, it's not about telling them anything. it's about listening to them, sharing how they think we can reach out for the vote. that goes for them and many manifestations, whether it's women, whether it's millenials, of color, people are concerned about climate, whatever their passion is. and my thrill of it all is candidates are so great. many millennial, many not, but listening to millenials, they know their purpose. they know their why. they know why they're running. they know their subject, whether it's climate, whether it's voting rights, whatever it is,

they -- whatever their purpose is, they know about it. they know how to get something done in terms of attracting people to their point of view. most importantly, they know that they must listen to their constituents. it's about their economic security. if they have that confidence they're our candidate is in sync with that authentically. authentically. this is what i believe. this is why i'm running. this is why i think i deserve your vote. tell me how you see things. listen, listen, listen. but this is a pivotal moment in our country and has really less to do with democrats and republicans than to do with our honoring the vows of our founders. what they fought for. honoring the sacrifice of our men and women in uniform. what they fight for.

and honoring the aspirations of our young people, what they aspire to. our founders, our founders, going into this month of july we all revisit their sacrifice, their vision and the rest. but they gave us one set of guidance that is very simple. they couldn't possibly imagine how many we would be or how different we would be from each other, but they knew we had to be one. so, as we go forward with this, we want to be unifying in our country. if the there's one thing that would unify our country, it would be to reduce the role of money in politics and let's have the debate on the subjects without that leverage weighing in, but instead increase the leverage for america's worming families and the confidence they have in the system so that they will speak out and they will vote. [ applause ] >> i can't think of a better end to our session and a better

introduction to the next. leader pelosi, thank you so very much. thank you. i'll bring my colleague up. >> the thank you so much. i want to start off by thanking leader pelosi for her insights. thank you for all you do for so many. i'm the executive vice president of external affairs at the centers for american progress action fund. i'm pleased to moderate a discussion with three distinguished members of congress, who are playing key roles in this powerful democracy reform movement. representative john sarbanes represents maryland's third district. he's chairman of the house democrats democracy reform task force. congressman sarbanes played a big part in formulating the better deal for our democracy, which we'll talk a little bit about in just a moment.

he's also the lead sponsor of the house resolution which brings this reform package to legislative life. since being elected in 2006, representative sarbanes has fought for democracy solutions such as small donor financing, which is a central pillar of the better deal package. and he is also working on another piece of legislation that cap supports a ban on lobbyist fund-raising. thank you, congressman sarbanes, for being here today. representative terry sewell, who represents alabama's seventh district, is a trail blazer who's been fighting to strengthen our democracy throughout her career. since joining the house in 2011, representative sewell has become a leading voice on the importance of protecting voting rights. in fact, the better deal reform package includes a major piece of legislation from representative sewell. we heard about it from leader pelosi a moment ago. the voting rights advancement

act, which would take the critical step towards fully restoring the voting rights act. congresswoman sewell has said that if we want to build a stronger democracy, we have to engage and empower all american voters. thank you for being here, representative sewell. and finally, i'm thrilled to introduce representative jayapal, who serves as vice chair of the democracy reform task force. while congresswoman jayapal is still in her freshman term, she's already made her presence known in a big way. she's been one of the most outspoken and eloquent leaders against president trump's inhumane practice of separating immigrant children from their parents. as a member of washington state senate, she was a champion of automatic voter registration and i'm proud to say cap is now working with the congresswoman on legislation to ban members of congress from receiving campaign

donations from organizations that their committees oversee. you heard leader pelosi talking about st. ignatius loyola and the jesuits. the congresswomen and i are proud classmates and hoyas. please join me in welcoming these three members of congress to the stage. i'm going to start with you, so grab your seat, mr. sarbanes. thank you so much for being here. you have been a leader for many, many years on democracy of reform generally. and spearheading much of the work leader pelosi talked about on a better democracy. you head the task force. would love for you to talk about what's in the package and as importantly, what the conversations with your colleagues have been around democracy reform issues and do

you think the time is right for finally taking a step to move some of these important policies forward. >> thank you. is my mike on? can you hear me back there? no? okay. how about now? it's green. how's that? >> perfect. >> okay. i want to thank c.a.p., first of all, for hosting this, more importantly, for this sustained support for the broad package of democracy reforms we're here to talk about today. and i think leader pelosi punk tu the w punctuated all the reasons we need this and all the ways we can achieve it. i, too, think this is a moment. we have the opportunity, we believe, and many of us in the

house democratic caucus, believe that if we can get the gavel back, we can put forward a broad set of democracy reformed and maybe achieve reforms the likes of which we haven't seen in terms of how robust they are and meaningful since right after watergate. i think that's the kind of moment we're in right now. it's because the public is so angry, they're so disillusioned. they so are convinced their voice is not heard in washington and in congress and in government, that they are desperate for some set of solutions that will restore their voice. and when people feel powerless, they can sometimes reach for pretty disruptive solutions to their anger. i think we saw that in 2016. what democrats want to do is put toward an affirmative, constructive set of democracy reforms that can channel that anger towards something meaningful and positive and restoretive of the democracy. so, what we've put together,

which we believe represents a better deal for our democracy is a broad comprehensive framework of democracy reforms that's been alluded to. it falls into three baskets. you can google hres-59 by the people, that's where it exists now, and we introduced it a couple weeks ago with 162 original co-sponsors within the democratic caucus. it's a very powerful declaration of what we want to see. but it falls into three very clear baskets of reform. one has to do with voter empowerment and making sure the people feel like they're respected as voters. that's where you get to redistricting reform, strengthening the voting rights act, automatic voter registration. all the things that can make it easier, not harder to vote in this country and exercise the franchise. that's the threshold demonstration of whether you're committed to the democracy. and i'm very pleased to be here

with two colleagues who have really been -- i mean, terry's been here a little longer than permilla, but they come from backgrounds where they've been fighting for a long time and immediately in arriving in washington they took a leadership role. they represent what our colleagues across the caucus are doing, which is coming forward with ideas. not their own ideas that they sort of made up, but ideas they formulated based on listening very, very carefully to their constituents, to the way people feel out there. that's what leader pelosi talked about. i think democrats are listening. i think we get it. i think this package of reform shows that we get it and represents our efforts to achieve something meaningful. voter empowerment, voting rights, lifting up the american voter, protecting the franchise. that's a critical, critical piece of the voting package. second basket is ethics and accountability. how do you promote and translate

people's expectation that when lawmakers get to washington, they will behave? that's essentially what that basket is about. don't turn things over to the lobbyists, don't violate ethical norms, don't accept the presevenprecepts of the government office. the second basket is a whole set of proposals. behind each of these things in the resolution, i can tell you there are meaningful pieces of legislation that have been introduced. but these are the proposals that say, behave, be ethical, be transparent, be accountable. that's the second basket of democracy reforms. and the third, my favorite, is the campaign finance reform basket. and this is where -- this is

tough. because this is where the cynicism is so deep and so corrosive. you have to show you're going to do something real. if you're democrats and you get the gavel and you go to do something and you don't make it real, then the public may say, we traded in one party that's bought and sold for another party that's bought and sold. they want to see that we're going to make a difference. this is the disclosure of where the big money comes from so people know where the money is pouring into their democracy. it's strengthening the federal elections commission so it can do its job and enforce the rules. i mean, these are all things that matter to people out there. it's a constitutional amendment to try to address that tragedy of the citizens united case and fundamentally, it's creating a new way of financing campaigns in america that's based on small

donors and matching funds. and before i sort of close these comments, i just want to say as to that piece, i think there's nothing that will do more to address people's sense of powerlessness than to create a system of financing campaigns that puts the average person, everyday citizen, right at the center of the solution. we can have all the rules in the world about policing the conduct and behavior of the big money players and the lobisbyists, an we should. but if we're going to get people out of the bleachers of their democracy and onto the field where they feel like they have power and they matter, we have to give them a way of saying, you know what, we'll underwrite these kaecampaigns so you don't have to go hat and hand to the lobbyis lobbyists, go to the corporations. you go to washington and you represent our interests, not the

special interests. voter empowerment, ethics and accountability, h. res-59 by the people resolution, that's where we make our declaration of principles on this. that's going to be our north star if we can get the gavel and move quickly as a first order of business to get a meaningful set of reforms on the house floor. >> fantastic. here here. it's probably no surprise that the first bucket is the voter empowerment and talking about voters. congressman sewell, you have been a leader on these issues while in congress and before. it's really thrilling to have you here. i want you just to talk a little more about that sort of set of issues. just to say that last week the center for american progress released a new report that advanced a pro-voter agenda. to increase voter participation and making voting more convenient, which is one of the problems. not the only problem but one of

the problems to voter empowerment. can you talk a little about why protecting and expanding the right to vote is really so critical to ensuring and strengthening our democracy? >> absolutely. first, i want to thank c.a.p. for putting on this program. it's an honor for me to be here with my colleagues. i represent alabama's seventh district, which includes my hometown of selma, alabama. you can't grow up in my district and not understand the power of the vote. more importantly, the sacrifices that were made for the right to vote. i can't understand how, you know, just 11 years ago we reauthorized the voting act rights of 1965 for 25 years. that was in 2006. and so 12 years ago, and overwhelmingly it passed both houses of congress. voting rights should be

nonpartisan. we shouldn't be an elective office. and looking to suppress people's right to vote. as elected officials, we should make it easier to vote, not harder to vote. the rockbed, the cornerstone of our democracy is the right to vote. and all of us know that the shelby versus holder decision, i think in some conveys it's befitting that the -- that selma gave us -- selma, alabama, gave us the voting rights act of 1965 and shelby county, alabama, gave us the court decision that took the enforceability away. but it's important to notice that the voting rights act is still constitutional. what the -- what the members of the supreme court said is congress must come up with a modern day formula that we were actually discriminating against states like alabama for what they did back in the '50s and '60s, surely things have changed. what the voting rights

advancement act, and i'm just honored that piece of legislation is a seminal piece of legislation, and it puts the teeth back into section 5 by giving a formula, a modern day formula. we're not going to look at what happened in the past, you know, 50 years ago. we're going to look at 1990 going forward. if there are four or more state wide violations of voter discrimination, then you would be considered a covered jurisdiction and, therefore, any changes to voting laws would have to be precleared by the justice department. and if you look at 1990 going forward, 13 states have had, you know, state wide -- state wide violations. states like alabama, mississippi, and louisiana, and also states like arizona and new york. so it's not just the deep south. but we have a problem even vote

of voter discrimination and voter suppression that has made it harder for folks to vote. no longer do we have to count how many jelly beans are in a jar or recite how many counties are in the state of alabama to be able to vote. people think somehow we've won a big victory. and we have. but the reality is there are modern day forms of suppression that are just as bad as those taxes. think about the fact that photo i.d., everyone thinks it's innocuous. you have to have a photo i.d. to get on a plane. but i have a lot of people in my district that have never been on a plane. i have a lot of people in my district who were born at home in rural parts of alabama and don't have a birth certificate. there are folks who literally find it harder to go to the polling stations because they're disabled or they're senior citizens. and we should be making voting

easier and not harder. and the reality is modern day forms of voting suppression, while they're not as overt as the past, they're no less sue expressive and no less discriminatory. i think about my father, who recently passed, but for 14 years my dad had a massive stroke and wheelchair dependent. my dad no longer had a validly issued driver's license because he was wheelchair bound. but he was determined to go and vote. it's not surprising that 33 states after the shelby versus holder decision came about and took away the enforceability, 33 states started having these photo i.d. laws and suppresses ive voting tactics. alabama was one of them. they passed it in 2011, they held onto it and time 2013 in that shelby decisions was

decided, they implemented it. 2013 was the first time in alabama you had to have a voter i.d. to go and vote. if you didn't have a driver's license, then you had to get a special photo i.d. my father, obviously highly motivated to vote for his daughter in the 2014 election, went and got it. i think about howa arduous it ws for my parents, my mom, small town, little selma, but a very famous town, that courthouse had been grandfathered in the ada laws. it no longer had to have a ramp. let me repeat this. it was grandfathered in. it was an old courthouse, been around for a long time, didn't have a ramp to get up there. and so here's my mom and dad. dad good up early. thank god we have home help. we saved up money to have one of those vans that kneels down to

transport easy. but a lot of folks don't have those same kind of amenities. and those are the folks who are being left behind. they are the voices not being included. and it's unfortunate. we have got to do something to teeth back into it. we should be like oregon, mailing in ballots. why can't we mail in ballots? we have primary run-off tomorrow. it's 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and god forbid the machines are broken at 7:00 a.m. that happens. what you found is the voting rights act was effective. it was actually too effective, as ginsburg likes to say in her dissent in the shelby decision. but the reality is that since we've had the shelby decision we've had long lines, like maricopa county. why was that? well, prior to the voting rights act being stripped, any changes in polling stations had to be precleared.

you couldn't just willie nilly close down a polling station without giving notice, getting approval. 800 polling stations in maricopa county, now you're down to something like 70 in 2016. people don't know where to go to vote. when that happens, if any one person is denied the opportunity to vote, it affects the integrity of our election system. we should be outraged by that. and young folks should understand the power of the vote is how you affect public policy. and i know they know that because we see activism on the grassroots level like we've never seen before. which goes back to what leader pelosi was saying. my optimism is that the same activism that same young john lewis that prompted the

committee to organize and get people fired up about voter equality is the same thing, i hope, will ignite young folks to want to care about voter -- modern day voter suppression and what we can do to make sure everyone has a seat at the table. campaign finance reform is the way to affect money in politics. but if you don't have access to the ballot box, a state like alabama could impose photo i.d. laws and then all of a sudden close down 31 dmv offices. what's the most popular form of voter i.d.? a driver's license. and those closures were mostly in my district, where people were already in rural, underserved communities. it's unfair. it's not right and it grs to the heart of our democracy. we should all be upset about it. we should all be enraged by it and motivated to make sure that access to the ballot box is the first priority, voter empowerment.

>> thank you. >> one of the things i'm going to come back and want to hear from each of you is conversations you have had with your constituents, with people in your district, with people in the states that you've traveled around in and with your colleagues, both on the democratic and the republican side of the aisle with these kind of things. they seem fundamental issues that i love to hear more about. congresswoman jayapal, you've become -- you have been for a long time a leading figure speaking out against the republicans' inhumane policy of separating immigrant children and their families. you were arrested at a protest, i believe, in the senate. >> the trouble, i like to say. >> today, in fact, this morning we released a paper that tracks the huge influence of the private prison industry on republicans' cruel and illogical detention policies. it talks a lot and goes to what

leader pelosi was talking about earlier with campaign cash and the result on the republican side of the aisle. the top two prison companies give massive amounts of campaign cash, heavily favoring republicans, and spend prolifically on lobbying. cap reports, several of you do as well, these anti-corruption solutions to help reduce this kind of dynamic. one of the policy solutions is to ban committee members from receiving contributions from interests under their jurisdiction of their committee. it's a policy that seems to make lots of sense but yet is a policy that has yet to be enacted. can you share your thoughts on the current situation and the committee contributions ban specifically and how this co corrosive effect of the money goes to the heart of theyish. >> absolutely. it's great to be back with my fellow hoya.

thank you to c.a.p. we're so fortunate to have leaders like john and terry. and i had a chance to go on the civil rights pilgrimage this year. i can tell you terry sewell in alabama, in selma, is absolutely beloved because of her deep commitment and deep work to these issues. we couldn't be more fortunate to have you on this. and john has just been a champion of making sure that we really take this on in a serious way, in a way that distinguishing democrats from republicans, and that we put it at the top of the agenda. it's not just a better deal. it is the only deal that works for our democracy. and so i want to thank you, john, for that. i'll just say, before i get to the committee contributions piece, that i come from a mail-in ballot state. washington state is one of those states. and i do think, actually, there's work to be done around how we use that form of

democracy across the country. there are challenges with it, but it does allow us to get away from some of the other problems. we have seen over the years in washington that when we moved, we had some initial problems, but we are starting to get through a lot of those. i actually think colorado has some of the best models around how to do -- a framework that allows you to do mail-in and also allows you to have a place where people can get support. and i got into voting issues because when i was an advocate, started the largest immigrant advocate organization in washington state, i felt no one was listening to us. i couldn't get elected officials' attention. the felt the only two ways to do that was to either have money or to have votes. we had no money. so, we decided to go for votes. i ended up leading the largest voter registration drive in the history of our state. 23,000 new american citizens

registered to vote. as a result of that, washington has some of the best policies around immigration, but also around a whole host of other things. and i've continued that work with the automatic voter registration bill, which i wrote for washington. it was complicated because we're also one of the only three states in the country that allows driver's licenses for everybody regardless of citizenship. we had to work through some things. that was passed recently when we took over the senate, democrats took over the senate, right after i left, of course, but i'm going to be in a majority one of these days. very soon, hopefully. and then we have -- i think we'll talk about this maybe later but also launched a democracy voucher program in seattle that has been incredibly successful. we've had some learnings around that as well. and so, for me, the issue i kept hearing when i decided to run for office is, politicians don't listen to us. it's everything you've heard right here.

it's unfortunate that that is the perspective, but it's there for some very legitimate reasons. so one of the big connections that voters make in their mind is why do you vote for something that is clearly bad when you know it's bad? and you see that with the way that votes can track -- can track money. so, this report that c.a.p. has released has been incredibly important because the family separation issue has shed a light on a lot of things that are really wrong with immigration enforcement. very wrong with the way in which we've started to treat immigrants really over the last ten years but now a force that's being use lighted by donald trump is really mass detention and deportation force. if you look at the numbers under that, what you see is these two prison companies, which is in the c.a.p. report. and i really hope everybody reads it carefully. those companies contributed $10

million to primarily republicans in order to move agenda of appropriation dollars for an ever-expanding mass incarceration system for immigrants. that's what it is. don't be fooled by immigration detention. these are private for-profit prison companies that put millions of immigrants into prison and, in fact, using prisons and jails, county jails and other facilities. you can see how those contributions to members of the appropriations committee have really helped drive up that number across the board of people that are held and the billions of dollars that are now spent on incarcerating immigrants. so, the bill that we're working on and crafting together with c.a.p. and that we really are excited about and thinking through exactly through how this works, is if you're on a

committee of jurisdiction, don't you think you shouldn't take money from the people who are lobbying before you? i mean, it's sort of that simple, right? and so how do we look at the contributions that members get? how do we learn whether those contributions have a -- whether there's a financial -- whether there's a financial interest in those contributions that are directly tied to a policy result? because ultimately the american people just want to know this, are you accountable to me or are you accountable to the people that give you money? and there is work that we can do to make the people that give you money through democracy vouchers. part of what we're doing there is saying everybody gets to have some money through public financing and that's the way we fund elections. that's the fundamental change we're looking at. but there's also the question of, until we get to that point, where we're fully publicly financed, how do we make sure that if you're on a committee, you don't take money from those

interests? so, we're excited about that and grateful to c.a.p. for the work with us on that bill, but i think it's a really important -- and you can look at industry after industry in sort of seeing the deep connection between who gets money and then what is it that comes out of that committee or that particular side. we have a real opportunity, i think, if we take back the gavel, when we take back the gavel, to make this a distinguishing factor because in the end, all of these reforms that we're talking about, whether it's the voting rights act or whether it's, you know, actually how does this money get funded for elections, that this is about people's belief in the integrity of our democracy. that's what we're really talking about. are you responsible back to us? it's very exciting. and i think -- i know we're going to run out of time here, so maybe i'll quickly mention

the democracy vouchers piece, in case we don't get a chance for a second round here. we instituted a democracy in seattle in 2017 that went into effect in 2017. basically, you had to go out and everyone gets a $25 voucher that you can put towards a candidate. and you have to electricity a certain amount of voeuchers and that requires person-to-person conversation to get those vouchers. what we found out of the results of that is that the top two vote-getters in our city council race were actually people who were funded through the democracy vouchers. the people who utilize the democracy vouchers tend to be lower income, folks of color, young people. those are the people that finally felt like, wait, i have some skin in the game here. i have a voucher. you need my voucher. that means you have to talk to me and that means ultimately you know that i financed your campaign. so, we're excited about

continuing to expand it. we've made a few changes and tweaks based on how it worked last time around. and one of them, for example, is getting the vouchers out a little later. people weren't declaring for seats a little later so we moved the timeline a little. we had to do work with our limited-english proficient populations to make sure they understood how to use the vouchers. but this is really the future of our country, i think, is getting to a public financing system where everyone feels like they have skin in the game. and if there's money that has to be put out for campaigns, it's publicly financed and we all get to have a piece of it. >> great. >> can i just -- >> yes, please do. >> i wanted to follow on a couple of things there. the democracy voucher program in seattle is really ground-breaking and exciting, because, as you pointed out, the candidates want to come find this person that they didn't really need before when it came

to financing their campaigns. all across the country to punctuate the idea we're not chasing a unicorn idea with small matching system and public donor solutions, states, cities, counties are implementing these cities. montgomery county, maryland, just put in a six to one match on small donations. over 20 candidates qualified for public financing. by the way, this is a critical piece of it. there's a lot of terrific candidates who if you had public financing campaigns would step into that space and would be able to be viable and competitive but they can't do that if lobbyists and corporations and big money folks are the only people you can get money from because they don't know those people. so it democraticizes the donor base and further democraticizes the candidate pool. that's why it's incredible valuable. i wanted to tell a story which really puts a fine point on this

issue of how committees operate and the money that flows to members of those committees. back in 1982 there was a senator named john stennis. this is a story in a book called "too damn much money." according to kizer at that time, for the first time stennis was facing a pretty competitive election. he had never raised more than a couple hundred thousand dollars before as a senator, but he had this young upstart, aggressive guy running against him, someone named haley barbour, governor of mississippi and had other roles within the republican party. some lobbyists and consultants came to him, to stennis and said, look, you have to raise a lot of money here. and that's the only way you can beat back this challenge. stennis said, what are we talking about here? they said, a couple million dollars. chump change now compared to the cost of senate campaigns. but to stennis, this was a huge sum of money.

and so stennis kind of looked at the guy aghast and said, how on earth am i going to raise $2 million? and the consultant said, well, there's a lot of these industryings, defense corporations and others that are in defense industry that your committee has jurisdiction over. you ought to talk to the people that represent them and see if they would be willing to contribute to your campaign. and according to the account, stennis, who was kind of sitting behind his desk, got sort of deflated and he sat there for about 45 seconds, just kind of deep in thought. and then he looked up to this fellow and he said, would that be proper? so, we've gone now in a 30-year stretch from a time where the culture was such that the proposition that you would do that would be viewed as improper

to a time where it's actually expected. it's part of the way the system works. what stennis was articulating there is what the average person looks at and says, this is a no-brainer. how can you not act with a conflict of interest if you're putting yourself and us as the people that support you in that kind of position? it's why reining in the influence of money in all these different ways -- the bill we're going to be introducing soon on lobbying reform, it says lobbyists can't bundle up millions of dollars and, boom, drop them on the front of the ground in front of you and say, by the way, i need to talk to you about this provision, that provision. want to talk? oh, sure. they can't do that. they have to register based on one contact. we're going to have a michael cohen loophole in there so you can be offering strategic advice, but if you're doing it

on how to access the government and influence it, that has to cause you to be registered. so, again, the public, they're way ahead of this. and they're kind of out there saying, if you can't do this stuff, why on earth would we trust that you have our interests at heart? this is a test of us and i think we have a set of solutions that are going to say powerfully to the public, we get it. are we going to accomplish everything overnight? no. but democrats have heard you. they understand why you're angry. and people are so cynical. maybe we can't get them back, but we have to try. and i think if we deliver something real, we've got a real chance of doing that. >> i also think -- yeah. i also think that we cannot allow the cynicism that exists to affect the voter participation in our democracy.

i mean, in order to get a seat at the table, everything we -- we're all affected by politics and government. be it local, state or federal level. people need to understand what's at stake. and i think that, you know, if i could -- if i could leave you all with one thought, look, if we could elect a democrat in the state of alabama for senate in a red, red state, because we were able to articulate what's at stake, and people actually went out and voted in numbers, that made a difference. so, your vote does count. your vote does matter. i mean, at the end of the day, campaign financing is a huge part of the lack of integrity. but the other part of that is, people feel like their vote doesn't matter. and we have got to figure out a way to address the fact that low voter turnout doesn't to better public policy. low voter turnout means fewer

people are deciding who gets to sit at the table. and directly related to all of this is the fact that special interests, not only do they get a seat at the table, they seem to be getting all the seats at the table. seem to be getting all the seats at the table, these special interests. so we're going to have to figure out a way that people can feel empowered, and that's what the voting empowerment section is about, but it's more than just voting rights and breaking down barriers. it's also the fact that we have always been one supreme court justice away from eroding so much progress. and the fact that we had, you know, the shelby decision and we've seen a cessation of other decisions, including most recently the voter purging, since when is voting a right that you can lose? i mean, just because you don't write an op-ed or protest in the streets or get arrested doesn't mean that you don't have the fundamental right to protest government. that's a fundamental

constitutional right. just because you missed church or don't go to temple doesn't mean that you don't have the freedom of religion. and just because you don't vote in every election doesn't mean we should be able to take away someone's right to vote. [ applause ] >> we have to wake up to the fact that the baseline is voter participation. that is what makes our democracy healthy. and the reality is some of our colleagues are losing elections by 5% of the people choosing a whole congressional seat. that's unheard of. but that's what happened in crowley's seat, i heard. the reality is that voter participation is where it's at, and we've got to figure out a way to empower voters to realize that their vote does matter, and when i think about the fact that people were so cynical about alabama ever electing a democrat, it does matter who our candidates are. clearly that matters.

and having credibility in communities already was a running start for doug jones. but the reality is that for us to have african-american turnout the level of obama in '08 and surpassing african-american turnout in 2012 in the state of alabama meant that a whole lot of people went to the ballot box and it made a difference. >> and i want to have each of you sort of provide kind of a concluding comment here. these are topics that we at cap with the three of you could talk about for a long time, so i want to thank you for being here. i want to thank cap's democracy team, liz and mike and danielle and alex for incredible work in partnering with members of congress, elected officials all around the country. the innovation we see at the state and municipal level is incredible and we want to raise that up. so thanks to all of you for being here. sort of as you provide a last

comment to our audience here, you talked a little bit about how the cynicism of voters, we've talked a little bit about it, the distrust, the lack of confidence in government, the pro-democracy and values reforms you're talking about, how does it all intersect? should candidates be talking about health care and the economy? should they be talking about democracy and voting? is there a blend of everything? you seem to be connected to constituents in a way that is incredible and i hope is not unique but it's something you can share with your colleagues as we look ahead to november. but just sort of as you provide concluding comments about the issues and what's at stake for our democracy. >> sure. well, thanks for having us, and i'll just go back to what leader pelosi said. i don't have to go on too long about it. she made those point that it's not about talking about

democracy reforms, it's the fact they go together. the reality is the reason the pharmaceutical industry has so much influence in washington, the reason we can't get medicare to be able to negotiate drug prices with the pharmaceutical industry is because they have an army of lobbyists, they contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to campaigns, they have superpacs and they make sure we can't get that result. the oil and gas industry has a real hold on climate change and the environment because they have the money to lean in and get the attention of lawmakers in ways that the average person and folks that care about the environment cannot do. on the economy, wall street wrote that tax bill and it was a pay on delivery exercise. you look at who sent in and how much money they sent in to paul ryan and to these other crafters of the bill when that tax bill

got delivered. i mean, talk about fueling people's cynicism. that was payment on delivery are. and leader pelosi read you the quote where they feel perfectly comfortable just talking about it out in the open. how can you blame the person who is sitting there in their kitchen watching this play out on their television who are saying, you know what? i'm walking away from this democracy because it doesn't respect me. i have no voice. people don't care about who i am. and they go up into the hills and they hunker down. and i'll close by saying this. a lot of them, because we talked to them, and a lot of them are saying, we'll come back into the political town square. we'll come back into the democracy if you unrig it, if you fix it. we'll come back.

and what we're saying is, we need you to come back to help us fix it. this is a partnership. we're going to put forward something real and meaningful, but we need the public to stand up and say, yes, this is what we want. go get this done, democrats. that's what the better deal for our democracy is. that's what the by the people resolution is. this is a moment. i think we can seize it. i think we can make this happen. [ applause ] >> well, you know, i think it's an exciting time for us. we have to deliver but it's an exciting time and there's a lot of opportunity. when i ran in 2016, mine was the most expensive non-swing district race in the country. we have a top 2 primary system. it was a $7 million race. i said at the very beginning that i was not going to take

corporate pac contradictioibuti. and i had 82,000 people across the country who supported the campaign and the average contribution was $23, so we beat bernie sanders. and the thing that was exciting to me about that is it all boils down to trust. everything that we're talking about, even the voter reforms that we're talking about, the voting rights act, is a core issue of trust between who makes democracy real, right? it's like, how do we make democracy real? we have to give people the access and the ability to vote. we can't just say, you have the right to vote if you don't have access or the ability. the same is is trtrue of the re we're talking about. we're saying to people, we want you to trust us, and if you trust us, we can be accountable to you. part of that is about the money in politics. now you see people understanding what happens when they don't vote, and there are great reasons for why they didn't vote. some of it is access, some of it

is deep cynicism for good reason. we can't ignore that fact. so what we're seeing now is people coming back into the streets, the marches, all of tha that, how we translate that to ballanc the ballot box, and i think people seeing that -- today i saw the red and blue candidates don't accept superpac contributions. that's a sea change and that requires a little bit of catching up to the voters. john invite, the votes right, t way out ahead of us because they want to see this campaign is real. how do we make sure that ultimately we're going to get a democracy where everybody does have a seat at the table and actually are the people that are listened to. when we say we represent people, we don't represent corporations,

we represent 72,000 individuals in our districts. i think this is an incredible opportunity. i think we've seen the ball move so dramatically along, thanks in part to colleagues in the house who have put together this package, but thanks to the american people for making the connection between what happened in 2016, what is happening today, the fact that we're one vote away in the supreme court from taking back so much progress on so many levels, and recognizing that they are willing to do their part but we have to do ours. and that's the incredible opportunity in front of us, and it's an exciting one, and i am really excited to put this -- first of all to win in november, and to put this forward as the first area that we need to be working on as a democracy. >> i think that in order to get a better deal for our democracy, we have to take back the house.

we have to be the people setting the agenda, setting the priorities. that means we need people to go and vote. it's just that simple. and i believe in homework. so i've been telling folks, yes, it's important to expand the tent and to register more people, but the critical thing you have to do is take people to the polls. we have to actually get folks to vote and be assured that their vote is counted. and we don't have by mail in alabama, and we won't get it. we don't have early voting in alabama. we don't have any of that in alabama. which means from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., get to the polls and vote. that's how you make a difference. and so all of our efforts are for naught if we're not setting the agenda, if we're not the party sitting at the table

making those priorities. so my advice, my last comment, closing comment, is just to remember the power that lies within all of us to vote. and it's not enough that we vote only in presidential elections. every election is an opportunity to make a difference, and every election is important. so i have been asking all of my constituents who see the intersectionality between health care and medicare, so is all the things, the bread and butter issues that affect their day in-day out life. they understand those are public policy issues. but it's hard sometimes when you are, you know, working three and four jobs and trying to make sure your children -- to actually make that translate to every chance there is an election to get out and vote. so we have to make that easier. we have to figure out a way to make that easier. i just want to say in closing,

what motivates me each and every day is just the thought of those folks bludgeoned on a bridge for the right to vote. people who, you know, were ordinary americans who saw an injustice and decided to work together, and as john would say, in a nonviolent way, band together and they achieved extraordinary social change. and they did that not in the halls of congress, they did that on a bridge in selma. so don't tell me that we today can't make a difference right where we are. bloom where you're planted, as they say. you don't have to be a member of congress in order to go out and fight for restoration of voting rights or to make a difference. you don't. collectively working together, we can make a difference, and i do believe that collectively working together, we can go to the ballot box and we can take back the house of representatives in november. and let's try to do that.

>> all right. [ applause ] >> i'm going to take one or two questions from our audience. we have just a minute or two. a quick question right on the aisle. we'll start here. i'm sorry, wait for a microphone. >> thank you. so talking about democracy, today trump is meeting with putin in a private meeting, and he met with russian officials in may of 2017 in a private meeting at the white house with no u.s. press involved. these are nice ideals, but i feel like a lot of americans, like our democracy, is being sold out to the russians, and i'd like you to address your republican colleagues who seem to be aiding and a bbetting by t exercising their oversight responsibilities of the so-called president. thanks. >> well, i'm on judiciary

committee, and i tell you, it is every day i am so saddened -- i'm furious, i'm a lot of things, but on the core i'm deeply sad to what that committee has evolved to. we should be exercising that oversight, we have a very specific role. we've asked for hearings, we've done political theater, but most of the judiciary committee is political theater. we had -- what was it, eight- or nine-hour hearing with the judiciary. after he had been deposed for nine hours behind closed doors about hillary clinton's e-mails but fundamentally to undermine anything robert mueller comes out with in his investigation. and when we have asked over and over again to address the very real concerns that the

intelligence committee has put out because of their findings -- not just one or two, but 19 intelligence agencies who have said this is a real threat. russian interference, foreign government interference in our elections. and yet we've been able to do nothing. i asked jeff sessions when he was in front of the committee. he actually said, yes, this is a critical issue we need to work on and we will start working on it, but what they did was cut the money from the budget, the tiny bit of money that was there, by the way. it was not a lot of money. it was a significantly smaller amount of money for election security work than we've been given for many years. but even that was cut. so i don't know what to tell you except to terri's point that taking back the house in november is absolutely critical on every level. because it isn't just trump, it is the complicity of my republican colleagues who might say different things to each of us behind closed doors and

sotovachi, but publicly they don't say anything about this. many of them go hat in hand to strip everything that they possibly can that is about checks and balances and the integrity of our democracy. so we have a lot of work to do. >> i think we're going to -- we have time for one question back here and that will be our last. >> hi. terri sewell spoke to the issue of the power of young voters and all that, and lately there's been discussion of changing the voting age nationally to 16. i'm wondering what you think of that policy like when voting age has been lowered in towns and it's driven more adults out to vote as well. >> well, i mean, it's an intriguing proposal. i haven't studied it a lot. i don't have the data that you may have at your fingertips.

so i guess i circle back in the meantime to the notion that the percentage of young people in that cohort who are of age under the current rules and are turning out to vote is still very low compared to some of the other cohorts within the broad electorate. so even as we are looking at opportunities to maybe bring even younger voters into the universe of who can show up at the polls, we still have a lot of work to do to mobilize the pool of young voters that's already in a position where they can register and they can go out and vote. and hopefully this set of proposals in combination with others will be something that motivates young people. i mean, i give the parkland students a lot of credit because within 24 hours, they went to

the vote as the solution. it was amazing leadership on their part. they connected it to showing up at the ballot box, and i think that effort is going to mobilize a lot of young people, and there's other issues that can do it as well. but let's try to maximize the power we already have in terms of the universe of young people that can step onto the field. this is the most powerful voting bloc that exists in america right now if it would step onto the field and exercise that right to vote. a lot of power is being left on the table. you and others can make sure that doesn't happen in the midterms and that we can get the gavel back and get the kind of oversight carmella was talking about. >> there are other ways to bring young people in, and we have tons of youth work that is as

young as 12 years old going door knocking, and how powerful is that when a 12-year-old says, excuse me, i can't vote, but you are voting for my future. so we found that young people have been incredibly instrumental, really, in moving their parents and that's another really important strategy as well as starting earlier with the pre-reg so people are ready when we get to 18 if we can't get 16 as the voting age. >> please join me in thanking our incredible panel. >> thank you. >> take a group shot?