mandate in the affordable care act. we will also talk with house foreign affairs member ranking member eliot engel. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] host: welcome to "washington this thursday, july 11, 2013. the house votes today on a farm bill split in half with subsidies for farmers but without reauthorization of the food stamp program. there are still questions about the note loan rates also pending. yesterday, house republicans met behind closed doors to talk about immigration reform. "the new york times" headline on line is republicans in the house resist overhaul for immigration. we would like to get your response to this story. here are the call --

host: we also have a line set up for immigrant callers -- you can also find us online -- host: well, here's "the new york times." a picture of president george w. bush, former president who spoke yesterday in dallas. we will hear more about what he had to say. he weighed in on immigration reform. but here is "the new york times" looking at the house meeting yesterday for republicans.

host: we would like to get your perspective on this story. here is how other newspapers are covering it. "the wall street journal" has the headline -- there is a photograph of speaker

boehner coming out of the closed-door meeting. it says -- host: you see in "the washington times" that the immigration bill the senate passed put marco rubio of florida in hot with the tea party. looking at senator rubio's future. and then a side piece -- "immigration reform unlikely this year with republican approach." we are looking at other stories happening in congress this week. student loans, the farm bill, other issues as well. before we take your call, let's get an overview of what is happening in congress with alexander bolton with "the hill ." senior staff writer. let's talk about immigration since it is our primary focus.

what did you learn about the closed-door meeting? how much information came out after the fact? guest: what came out after the meeting is the republican caucus is very divided over what to do next. the only area where there is consensus is there should be stronger border security and the interior enforcement provisions of the immigration bill should be strengthened. on the key issue of whether approximate 8 million illegal residents should be put on a ath to citizenship, there is staunch divide there. steve king from iowa to mow one of the leading opponents of the estimated atenship the caucuses led-50 on the issue. -- 50-50 on the issue. unless it is included in the immigration reform bill, it will not become law. that is why i think there is some declining optimism from the white house and democrats that this is going to get past.

because, as john boehner reiterated to his colleagues yesterday, he is not going to bring any ill to the floor unless it has a majority of republicans supporting it. right now the majority of the republicans don't appear to support a path to citizenship. host: alexander bolton's colleagues at the hill have this deadline. among of gloom deepens democrats over immigration reforms prospect." democrats make it clear that if the path to citizenship is not included, there will be no bill. they say that would be a political disaster for republicans. they point to the 2012 presidential election where mr. romney did terribly with hispanic voters, worse than john mccain and george w. bush. withboehner seems to agree that political assessment. he told his colleagues yesterday, he assured them he will not bring anything to the floor and pass it was only

and majority -- minority of republicans. he said he will follow the will of the caucus. but he told them, you better be on board with a path to citizenship or else we will be in a weak position politically. that is what the gop establishment has come around to an something karl rove had endorsed as well. we will see if that message sinks in. i think yesterday's meeting was an opportunity for rank and file members to vent about their concerns. but john boehner made clear we need to get over it at some point this summer. coalitions' voices are coming out stronger? we see the headline in your publication that the speaker warned the house gop that they will be weaker without immigration reform. you talk about the speaker's message to his caucus. what is the loudest voice that comes out of a meeting like yesterday, and it -- does it give you a sense of where things are headed? loudest voices coming

from the critics. they are the ones blasting away at the bill and they are the most vocal. the leadership -- i mean, paul ryan, chairman of the budget committee -- and he has taken a leading role in the negotiations -- he voiced optimism but dove into an elevator to avoid reporters. i think this is an uncomfortable spot for republican leaders, because little they realize that -- while they the realize the bill is in the best political interest, those who are most vocal are the observed of base who believe the path to citizenship is amnesty. the political conundrum for republican leadership is while it is good national politics to pass an immigration reform bill, it is bad politics on the district level. many of these house republicans represent largely white, laurel districts-- rural where latinos do not have as big an impact. it is a risk to support

something painted as amnesty, then to vote against it. if they vote against it, they don't have to worry about a primary challenge. by supporting comprehensive immigration reform, the critics compare it to the 1986 law, they would be doing a favor, perhaps, or marco rubio or whoever wins in 2016.ation but they are opening themselves up for strong criticism. the conservative base is starting to compare the senate comprehensive reform bill to the 2010 affordable care act. that is a comparison that makes a lot of republicans nervous. host: alexander bolton, let's give it to what is happening in congress. tell us about the farm bill. aest: the farm bill has been real headache for house republican leaders. they tried to pass at last month. usually this bill is noncontroversial. it has been lost. a big surprise for them and a big embarrassment for them. what it came down to is the

democrats would not vote for the bill because there was a $20 billion reduction in food stamps . conservatives did not vote for it because they thought it was an extension of big government. the solution was to break the bill in half. the republican leaders, house republican leaders reasoned that if food stamps were not part of this bill, then we would not have to worry about democrats voting against it. maybe we could get more democrats. that doesn't appear to be the case. democrats have blasted the bill. hoyer, house democratic whip, said this is a bill to nowhere. if the food assistance program is not included in the farm bill, democrats will not vote for it. now republicans are trying to whip the votes. the problem is the club for growth, and heritage action, the two conservative advocacy groups that have a lot of influence are still urging a no vote on this bill. even though the food stamp part of it has been separated.

they say this continues to be a wasteful government subsidy. forakes it very tough republicans to round up of the votes. they scheduled a vote for this morning, so it appears they think they do have the votes. but it remains to be seen the argument republicans have to make is it that this will repeal the farm bill language, and if we do pass it and it becomes law, we do not have to reauthorize it every five years, giving congress an opportunity to add more subsidies. let youll us before we go about filibuster reform. what are we seeing play out in the senate? guest: there is going to be a meeting today of the senate democratic caucus, and they will discuss what they are going to do on filibuster reform. this is tied to the july agenda for nominees. that thed is intent senate democratic leader is intent on moving a number of high-profile nominees who have

run into gop roadblocks. for thearthy, administrator of epa, and also tom perez, head of the labor and the nominees for the national labor relations board. richard cordray, the director of the consumer financial but he is a recess appointment so he needs to be confirmed by the senate. harry reid wants action on all of these people. if it doesn't happen, then he is going to, well, trigger the nuclear option -- at least that is what threat. at the meeting at the center for american progress where he urged the nuclear option. members of the senate, they are really skeptical harry reid will do this. he is an institutionalist. he has respect for the rules. he doesn't want to cause a partisan meltdown fairly early in the 100 13th congress. what the nuclear option is, changing the rules to a simple

majority vote. he isle change that looking at is taking away republicans' ability to filibuster nominees. if he would trigger the nuclear option, with the simple majority vote, republicans could no longer -- or the minority in general -- could no longer filibuster nominees. or down he could get up votes and get them confirmed in fairly short order. but there are members of his caucus who do not support this plan. they said it would turn the senate into the house by eliminating the supermajority threshold on a very important .rea carl levin, the chairman of the armed services committee falls in that category of opponents. so, harry reid is going to hash it all out today in the meeting. he is going to say, look, we need to get the nominees through. republicans have been obstructionist. we need drastic action. carl levin says he will speak out against the plan. so, they are going to try to come up with some consensus and

we have to see what people are going to say after the meeting. host: alexander bolton, senior staff writer for "the hill errico thank you very much. we are asking what you think about the latest report. house republicans met yesterday behind closed doors to talk about their ideas about immigration reform. "the new york times" headline is "republica in the house resist overhaul for immigration." the democratsn line. good morning. caller: good morning. i think they need to pass immigration reform. asinine that they have not patched things up. host: do you like what came out of the senate, julius? are there specific things you would like to see included? -- er: i think [indiscernible]

if illegal immigrants want to come to the country, they got to do it the right way. i feel that we need to get immigrants a chance in this country. host: that is julius from philadelphia. ill write in on twitter and says -- our immigration problems are a direct result of a political lawless class. fails to enforce immigration laws in order to buy votes. we see the tweet coming in from jan who said -- that says it all. gop will be weaker without immigration reform. not talking about our country. they should be working for all and not just the gop. she is referring to a headline in "the hill." "speaker boehner warned house republicans will be weaker without immigration reform." rockville center, new york, republicans line. caller: good morning. americansthe premise

are supposed to believe politically is that the republican party will be unable to provide leadership if it does not pass this immigration bill as it stands. obviously the conundrum for the republican party is the threat that somehow if they vote against this bill or weak in this bill as it stands now, they will likely lose the support of the hispanic base in the election. an important demographic. i disagree. wereongressional seats just rewritten in terms of redesigned in 2012. so, many of the seas, whether republican or democrat, are actually quite strong and likely to be reelected anyway. the second issue then becomes, what are the merits of the current legislation that the senate passed? as americans, we just got passed a healthcare know that did not do what it claims to do,

reduce costs, and creates an additional dragon contributes to the deficit. we also just went through the process of sequestration, something that the president and his administration passed, both the senate and the house to compromise, in the sense if they could not reach acceptable cuts, it will go into effect. it went into effect and as a result the government trimmed its budget by $85 billion. the bill as it stands now that the senate has proposed, i believe the 20,000 border guards, which would not come into effect until i think 2021 would cost at least 40 billion dollars. and i think for republicans, they have to see the trees through the forest. they should not be intimidated by the democratic party, the minority party in the house, and they should not be intimidated by the mainstream media that continues to carry their water.

this country desperately needs leadership. what it should say is, we will support immigration but we reject the hundred million dollars from las vegas. there are many things objectionable that i think to both democrats and republicans. this is the opportunity for the republican party today. host: can i ask you a follow-up to the beginning of your comments comments, looking at the politics? the associated press on yahoo news had a story this week that says republicans' knack for redistricting may help them in the house but it may work against immigration chances that national leaders may see article. while it helps them maintain the house seat, it may hurt them when it comes to the white house and the senate. what do you think about that? caller: i disagree. hispanics are an important demographic, and they are a growing demographic, but let them back.

there are a number of compositions and segments that comprise our society. to cater to them at the expense of any other american, irrespective of political belief, is ridiculous. the whole idea that the house of representatives is supposed to represent the people. it is supposed to represent all of us. this is the opportunity for the speaker, john boehner, to define his leadership. and while his job has been described as herding cats, at the end of the day, he has to keep his finger on the poles of what is best for this nation. and what is best for the nation is rejecting that immigration bill. host: let's go one to earl: from maryland. independent. also an immigrant. caller: how are you doing? the morning. -- good morning. you sit back and look at this from my perch, they are not going to solve this problem. if you see how the politics are being played, most of the

communities that the republicans are elected in are totally white majority, and they are not going to sacrifice their base in order to solve this problem. what happensat from another perspective, we need to see how white america deals with us. war, wecomes with -- to are all american and so forth. after the war, we go back to our corners. we need to look at this and see how others are treating us. how china is dealing with the caribbeans right now. are they really generous building universities or colleges, or are they pushing capitalism like the americans have done over the centuries? host: are you here in the country legally, and where did you come from? caller: i am here legally. i came from a caribbean island. i have been here to see all of

nowchanges from 1960 onto and see that when it comes to wars and battle, we are all americans. and then after we fight, then we want you to be back in your corner into your little niche. and after you lose a limb or your legs, you have to fight to get assistance. i am sick and tired of hearing the argument. it is eric and. mention the service of the military. you see a picture of former president george w. bush with two american servicemen who became citizens in a ceremony in dallas. the former president spoke yesterday on immigration issues. let's take a look -- listen to his comments. [video clip] a nation of immigrants, and we must uphold the tradition which has strengthened our country in so many ways. we are also a nation of laws. and we must enforce our laws.

be a lawful society and a welcoming society at the same time. we can uphold our traditions of andmilating immigrants honoring our heritage of a nation built on the rule of law. but we have a problem. the laws governing the immigration system are not working. the system is broken. we are now in an important over reforming those laws. and that's good. i don't tend to get involved in the politics or the specifics of do hope there is a policy resolution to the debate. and i hope that during the debate, we we keep a benevolent -- in mine and

we understand the contribution immigrants make to our country. and we must remember that the vast majority of immigrants are decent people who work hard and support their families and and leadtheir faith responsible lives. host: former president george w. bush speaking in yesterday. "says onington post immigration, bush is just another voice. int: let's hear from gina birmingham, alabama. independent line. are a nation of

laws and our nation has a history of immigration, but it was legal immigration. they came through ellis island. we checked them out. make sure they did not have visas. these people are coming across the border -- not just mexicans -- they are from other nations. chinese, afghans, from pakistan. this has nothing to do with latinos. thee is no word latino in bill. it is illegal aliens. you don't know who or where they are coming from. ok? the first constitutional duty of washington is to secure and protect the people. host: here is the internet, on twitter, the handle of the next person on twitter. they will object anything short of rounding up all immigrants. kim from north carolina. democrat.

go ahead. caller: i was going to say, if the republicans don't get in ,ood with hispanics and asians they've a choice between a fast death and slow death, the way the demographics are going. host: here is a view on twitter. republicans can't even pass a republican bill. very bad for gop future. ian is up next from florida on the democrats line, also coming -- calling in as an immigrant. where are you calling from in florida? caller: from dade county. host: go right ahead. caller: ok. sharing lot of people the same thought pattern that this is some sort of devious scheme to gain votes. but ultimately if you step back and look at the larger picture of things, you can easily see

that at the end of the day, that is really not the final determinant on who is elected. it comes down to the electoral college. i just wanted to share that. i hear a lot of people preaching on here about, again, this is some devious plan to be able to get an advantage in the popular vote. the mostis really not finite thing to go after. gothey really wanted to after the vote like that, via theg might be done electoral college. host: i understand you come from kuba -- cuba. what is the conversation going on right now in the cuban- american community in florida? it is relevant, and it is not relevant, i suppose.

if you look at -- i can't speak for every single cuban, obviously. we all have different opinions. it is hard to speak for a majority of people. host: are you hearing issues debated? change, if there is a there is a change. if there is not a change, the is not a change. host: frank from beverly, new jersey, on the republicans line. caller: how are you this morning? host: good, how are you doing? caller: not too bad. this is really getting out of control hear about this immigration stuff. nobody is really against legal immigration, ok? that is the republican party from way back, ok? ,nybody who comes here legally i don't have a problem with. but before they grant any amnesty or anything at all to any people coming into this country that are in here the border needs to

be protected, there needs to be a biometric security check on these people. because if you take a look in the long run, our prisons are full of people who are illegal immigrants. that is causing a burden on the taxes. the hospitals are overrun with them. when the hospitals don't get their bills paid, they get it from somebody else, which means charging me more money. their kids are in the school. they are registered illegally. is, -- the bottom line here if nothing is done about this, this is all going to implode and collapse upon itself. and one more thing before i go. every day you look at the news -- and i look at a lot of news. like those characters up there at the boston marathon. the overstayed their visas, and look at what they did.

which meant they were illegal and they killed and maimed people up there because our laws are not working. and until the laws start working with these people, then i don't want anything to pass right now until they straighten out the borders and some sort of personal biometric way they can -- like a retina scan or something so they know who you are. because the american people are getting sick and tired of the stuff going on. we never had this stuff going on like this now. fact ofs not a basic terrorism. these people are in this country and nobody knows who they are, and there are no checks. host: let's look at a story in "the washington post you." year,ssman paul ryan last his perspective on immigration reform. it says --

host: it talks about a conversation he had with congressman luis gutierrez, democrat from illinois. host: so, it looks at how congressman ryan is weighing in on this issue. frank, if you are still on the line, doesn't influence your opinion to the republican leaders taking a side on this issue? depends on what they want to do with the issue first. first, the security thing has to be worked out. without the security thing worked out, none of this stuff is going to work.

because these people are still going to come in here. and the employees in this country. the black americans are going to walk -- march on washington. part of the stuff is because the illegal immigrants. and the black population not being able to get jobs because the illegal immigrants are taking all of the jobs. patricia from hartford, connecticut. democrats line. an immigrant. caller: i'm just -- i am an immigrant. my mother was an immigrant. and she has been here over 25 years. she paid her taxes. she died here. in 2000, and she didn't even know her grandson until she came here. and i have a daughter -- granddaughter born here. you know what? i'm glad that president bush was

talking about immigrants. i smiled when i saw him talking about immigrants. citizenship -- citizen before she died. immigrants need a chance. we do need a chance. i pay my tax. i work. i work in america. my granddaughter was born here. immigrants, we need a chance to help ourselves. think abouto you the news story about republicans not getting on board with the senate version of immigration reform, and instead looking at individual bills? caller: i was so mad. my tv was on all day. i was so mad. we are people. they must see that immigrants are people, we are human beings. we leave our country, and we

need a chance to help ourselves. and we need that. we are human beings. host: here are the numbers that you can call if you would like to join the conversation. host: let's hear from maggie in ozone park, new york. democrat. caller: good morning, good morning. i am calling in reference to this. of the callers, and i think it is really a shame they are saying the immigrants are going to come here and take jobs. i think it is really sad. americans really need to understand that the days of sewing buttons on shirts for $20 tohour are over and we need

educate ourselves and get the jobs out there that are technologically driven. workdays -- piecework days are over. the misinformation out there. i don't know if it is ignorant or misinformation. but i think we need to stop and we need to open our doors. the majority of the immigrants who come here working very, very hard. tweeting ins julius -- i think the immigration reform needs to be passed because it's much needed. there are too many people entering the usa illegally. we hear this from paul -- the immigration issue has been mismanaged by both parties. laws have never been enforced fully. resident bush said it well. let's go to texas. shirley on the republican line. welcome, shirley. caller: yes, hello. i don't know how we can even have an intelligent conversation without bringing in mexico.

they have played us for fools for years and years and years. passage tofree people from anywhere to gloss mexico as long as they are coming into the united states. but you go into mexico and get in trouble and see how you are treated. until we can get mexico on board -- which is probably going to be impossible -- we can never, ever enforce our laws. we have to have total security of the border. we have to know who is coming here. and for those people who are here, i think they should go home. they came here illegally. we have laws. we have rules. and i know they are people. but the united states cannot take in every sad situation in the whole world. and if we don't do it soon, there will never be security in this country. we are being overwhelmed by this

wave of people coming in, which was probably going to become a tsunami, because we made it -- we give them citizenship. give them the right to stay here legally asking them the right to stay here legally. that is wrong. congress is wrong. the gang of eight should be tried for treason. they are not upholding the laws of conservation. host: another texan, tyler from the independent line. texas, we have a lot of immigrants. i do not call them aliens, because they are people. most of them were very, very hard. they are very good people, the ones i have come in contact with. i have neighbors who are immigrants. my thing is, i look at america this way. if they tell the truth i'm a most immigrants got here because of cheap labor. that is why they were brought here. then america ended up with a problem.

back in slavery time. so, now they have a problem. they are doing well, they want to send them across the border. we look at america, like i say. we are all immigrants. because the native americans owned this land. whites came from the european countries. they were not born here. they need to go through the history books, the ones against this, and see how america really was built. this really dish -- this country was really found it on a lie. check our history. we need to be a loving country. we need to pull together, because they are a growing race and their force will be reckoned with. host: on facebook, linda right in and says -- in and says --

host: marianne. immigrant, republican. caller: i am a little bit nervous. i came to this country in 1954. i married an air force soldier. i was in this country for 10 years. i raised five children. then i made my citizenship. what i am trying to say is, when go to over here, i had to the hospital, to the police, get examinations if -- examinations. if i was sick, i needed shot. i still have the chest x-ray from when i came over here. is, i am trying to say an immigrants, in a way. card,had to have a green the firstyear around of january, i had to go to the post office and check in until i

made my american citizen. and i had to work. book and dorn the all of those things. upsetw i get a little bit when the president says they are automatically going to be citizens. i mean, they should work for it. host: what do you think about some of the provisions in the senate that require a rating -- require a waiting period and paying back taxes? can they pay back taxes? the job is horrible. how can they pay back? host: where did you move here from? caller: i came from germany. in chicago, democrats line.

caller: i guess my point is i find it amazing that the ex- president, mr. bush, once out in support of this will -- come out in support of this bill. i think at least half of the republicans in the senate voted for this. there is $30 billion, if i am correct, for border security. and yet still the republicans in the house don't like the version? out ofs me just how touch and crazy these folks are. my second point, for all of the people caught up in the legal legal -- i don't know. whod a great grandmother came from europe. i don't know if she was legal or not. i don't a document who says she was -- that says she was.

the laws have been changed numerous times over the years. in the 1900s, there was a very strict law that limited the number of chinese that could come here. look what happened. they changed the laws. people out there get on up in the legal and the not legal, and they came here and work hard. yes, that is exactly what these people one. it is not that they will come over and get the citizenship and get all of this free money, as i hear some folks saying. the bill asill, and i understand it, has a waiting period, as you said. they have to work. they have to study. they have to pass a test. that just amazing to me this country that was founded on people coming here to seek a better life for themselves, that there would actually be people in this country who have been now thata while

wouldn't want to give that same chance to someone else. i find that really amazing. some let's hear tweets -- they are all about government failure. they run on it. a different perspective -- how much of the cost to become a -- how much is the cost of becoming legal citizens? how can a poor person better themselves if they have to pay for permission? other news -- boston marathon suspect was in court yesterday. we saw his first public court appearance. chargesed not guilty to in the bombing. times" the u.s. warns climate change could cause more energy breakdown.

is vulnerabletem to increasingly severe and costly weather events, according to a report from the department of energy to be published today. also, the rift among democrats calls efforts to reverse a ride and college loan rates. a bipartisan senate coalition on wednesday blocked a democratic proposal to retroactively cut interest rates on higher education loans and half, leaving any student -- student loan n-rescued and out and leading their divisions among democrats on how to resolve the dispute. times,"new york democrats shrugging off the delay of the health-care law employers that large have to give their employees health insurance. they are affirming their support for the health law. we will hear from members of congress later on this morning and get their perspective on the health-care law story. we are also seeing u.s. senat

ors are concerned about the sale of smithfield food, the nation's largest pork producer. the head of the company told skeptical lawmakers on capitol hill yesterday that the proposed 4.7 billion dollars sale of the virginia-based company to a chinese rival will create jobs and expand markets. members of congress are voicing concerns. that isn't "the washington times." in the op-ed pages, warmer senator byron dorgan who was a democrat from north dakota -- former senator byron dorgan, he "brokenece called promises" looking at the issues related to native americans, children as an at risk population. how to help with american indian communities, especially in light of the sequester which he says is devastating american indian communities. to you thisng morning about republicans in the house and the overhaul for immigration some of their

perspective. "the new york times" headline says republicans in the house are resisting the overhaul for immigration. what are your thoughts? woodbridge, virginia. a republican. caller: how are you doing? i have been sitting in -- and listening. it was a lady talking about people being against immigrants. my wife, she is an immigrant to this country. ishink what the big thing is the word illegal. if i go out here and break one of the u.s. laws aamodt i have to pay the penalty for it. jail or in end up in court -- i would either end up in jail or court. why do they get such a free pass? is it fair to the people in other countries trying to come to the u.s. legally but they don't have the opportunity because we have so many illegals here? i don't thinkt -- anybody is against immigration. i think what people is against

is the word illegal, you know? host: comments coming to us from twitter. tied to senate is so special interests that any senate bill must be viewed with heavy skepticism. sal from rockville, maryland. independent caller. caller: good morning. issue with the immigration, it is a bigger issue than a lot of people are even thinking about, i think. whether somebody is illegal or not -- this is where we stand at this point. the problem is that we need jobs, and why can't the toernment create the jobs filter through this funnel that we have existing? there's a lot of people -- this country was built on people coming here and building an empty slate and building it up. we built a very dutiful place. and when other people from other countries look at our --

anything on television, they seem nice, beautiful cars, beautiful streets, beautiful landscape -- trees. they see a lot of beautiful things, and they want that. they want that opportunity. just as the immigration, all the other immigrants wanted years and since this country got started. so now what we created is a situation where people do things illegally to get here so that they can get those things. -- the reform needs to be one, let's shut the gates. let's deal with what we've got. let's make it work. let's build the jobs we need to make it work and get this filtered through. and let's take care of the issues where people are coming in here illegally. man through a friend, he wanted to bring his daughter here so that daughter could get an education here. he was stifled in the country where he was from, and he got a

visa and came here and wanted to start a business i wanted to bring his daughter here to get an education. i was approached to marry him, and he gave me some money for me to marry him so he could bring his daughter here. i did it. i am not the only one. a number of people. that is an issue. like i told him at the time. i feel really sad for you. i understand your plight. i think it is horrible that our country -- that this goes on. got married, and what happened? did everything work out in terms of the legalization process? are you still legally married? -- echo caller: we were divorced. but we were married for nine years because it took nine years. host: did you live together? or was it a fake situation? a --r: well, it was somewhat of a fake situation. it was kind of convoluted.

yes,we were friends and, but it was not like the normal marriage where you marry someone and you build a life together. it was a marriage of knowing that i am helping him bring his daughter here to get an education here. she did get an education. and she's got a fabulous job. contribute into the country. paysys taxes and she taxes. they live a normal life. they will continue their life here in the united states. i have every intention of living here in the united states and building their life here. sharing yourfor story. coming up next, we will talk to members of congress who will weigh in on immigration as well as other issues before the house. right now, congressman kevin brady will be our guest, republican of texas. we will look at healthcare with them. coming up later, congressman eliot angle, democrat from new york, will join us. we will be right back. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national

cable satellite corp. 2013] >> i wanted a kind of representative look at american life. business,ed politics, entertainment, food, finance, art. i also was interested in this recurring pattern which you see with gingrich, which you see rah, jay-z, sam walton -- people who begin in humble places. they are not unlike the main characters, but they sort of reinvent themselves as something new and find a new language and riveting tohat is americans. and through that, they build an empire. and they can't shop building it. almost like an imperative, like a corporation.

you have to keep growing. as a person, as a brand, you have to keep growing. but eventually a decadence sets and where the language becomes kind of a parody of itself. they no longer seem to be producing something good. they just continue to produce. gingrich just keeps writing book after book. the cover of every issue of her magazine. so, they become celebrities that we are now familiar with, we just dominate our imaginations. and in a way, have come to replace the institutions that have faltered. intertwines the struggles of three americans whose american way of life has ailed them, sunday at 8:00 p.m. on the stand's "q&a." that garminem was did not understand -- that was his blunder -- he did not understand that with such a theory, natural selection could never really of work.

you have a population of one million white cats and one black cat. suppose being the black cat does provide you with some big advantages. blending theory, you mix things like gin and tonic, the black cat mates with a white cat and you get a gray cap. the grey cat mates with another white cat and you get the paler cat. of gray it gets diluted and diluted and the black would disappear. >> and astrophysicist explores the work of five scientists and the mistakes each one made on the way to historic achievement. saturday at 10:00 p.m. eastern. part of the tv this weekend on c-span two. >> "washington journal" continues. host: congressman kevin brady is our guest, republican of texas. thank you for being here. immigration is a big issue in

your home state of texas. tell us about what you got out of the closed-door meeting yesterday with house republicans . we are hearing reports and seeing news that there is a real split in the caucus. guest: can i tell you -- i was here during the debates when president bush proposed it. the discussion now is healthier than it has ever been. it really has been focused on what our priorities of the country are in immigration policy. how do we have smarter border security? what does the work force me to look at an the 21st-century and how do we train of american workers and fill the gaps best? having a real discussion on how to deal with legal status for those who are year versus citizenship, government benefits . i tell you, it is night and day different. day better.ht and i think at the end of the day, you are going to see legislation out of the house -- it is going to be different from the senate, but that is ok. we are not big on the type of

approach is -- we are 435 independent people. thoughtful a pretty piece or pieces of legislation. host: is there a danger of republicans getting bad press on this and not being able to pass something that is comprehensive enough that includes some sort of halfway to -- you fill in the blank. guest: i think we are resigned to get bad press from immigration issues, because that is the easy narrative to slap at us with. but i don't think it is accurate. because the discussions we are having our very respect will. they are very good ideas. and you are seeing a lot of them from a lot of people. again, this is the big issue. it is sensitive. but i think at the end of the day, we come up with a better solution on the issue than what the senate passed their host: should there be a pathway to citizenship?

guest: pathway to legal status is where the house will likely go. citizenship is reserved for those who come through the front door of legal immigration. those who overstayed their visas legalse another path, that it is my guess the answer. without a pathway to citizenship or government benefits. and that really reflects not two classes of citizens but two sets of behaviors. we think rewarding those -- the front door is a tough front door. it is expensive, lengthy, difficult. so, that needs to be fixed as well, by the way. host: let's look at your district, the eighth district of texas. in terms of population, it has 19.7% hispanic/latino population. much lower than taxes overall, which has nearly 40%. although it is sort of in line with the u.s., 17%. how do your demographic

influence things? guest: because we are outside the houston region and going north to the rural areas, we have a blend of minority constituents but our hispanic growth has really been among a different nurse. our hispanic chamber of commerce ofreally a dynamic group folks. they have the same issues every small business person has. we have a number of schools in the newer part of my district that has the majority of minority populations, with all the challenges. you, is very welcoming and diversified. we are just so focused on economic freedom, and welcome everyone who wants to be part of that. i just have a great district from that standpoint. host: we saw stories in the news and we talked about one earlier that said republicans should be concerned about the white house and what happens in 2016. the way the districts are set

up, you may be able to retain house seats but there is a concern among some republican strategist that it is not a winning strategy for the white house and the overall parity -- party. what do you think? guest: i think we need a discussion with all minorities. speaking as a republican, i think we have a better opportunity for them. i think we have a better vision for them. i now we are having trouble eating that even have in the conversation, because of some of the issues. i do not think we should pander to hispanics, asian americans. we will just get out pandered. we need a discussion. the way we do that is to find a good solution, a principled solution on immigration. host: are republicans listening to voices outside of congress? former president george w. bush speak yesterday in dallas and encourage some kind of movement forward. yes, i think most of listening to their constituents clearly because this is not a new issue. ilies have made decisions

on this. it helps, i think, to have former president bush way in because he really lead in this issue and really took a lot of slings and arrows and that process. but i also think we are listening to our small businesses, our technology community, those who just can't find workers. who are leading economic growth on the table. economicterms of growth, we saw "the wall street journal" editorial page and look at house republicans and immigration and express concerns about the direction house republicans are going. -- ays "the gop choice party of opportunity or closed borders?" it says --

host: more paths to meet u.s. labor demand. guest: what you are seeing in the discussion with our having is not just a closed the border discussion, but security first, so we don't repeat this problem in the future. as you know, the cbo estimates that the senate bill fails in that. only lessening illegal immigration from one third -- two one third from one half. security first, so we don't repeat the problem. the workforce issue, we really think is key. both low skilled and high skill. the question is, do you determine the workforce out of washington or do you get the free market a bigger say and a more flexible say for guest workers and visas? i think the answer is, the free market. hope the public gives republicans a chance, not a stone the old stereotype, but

really the discussions we are having now. host: if you would like to talk to congressman kevin brady, republican of texas, here are the numbers -- host: before we go to the phone, let's turn our attention to the federal health-care law. you held a hearing yesterday. this was a part of the ways and means committee. you are chairman of the house -- health subcommittee. you were looking at the employee -- employer mandate that was pushed back. guest: autumn line is, affordable care act is not ready for businesses, but it is not ready for families, either. out of fairness, because the two are such pillars of the overall law and so closely tied, that really if you are going to delay 14 a year, you ought to at least delay the other because you really cannot enact a mandate from workers without the mandate on businesses. thate are also concerned

because we will not be reporting, we will not be getting the important information from businesses about their plans and who is really eligible, we really opened up both taxpayers to fraud but also people applying. if you do not get it right, you face the repayment of subsidies, which is top on your checkbook, or find. -- fins. we are bringing treasury in wednesday because it was a poorly timed announcement for a major pillar of the health-care law. we want to know what led up to it. what other parts of the law are the deadlines being missed? so far, no other part has been reached on schedule and we are just a few months out. a democrat of new jersey

weighed in with his criticism on how the republicans are handled -- handling this. [video clip] >> is this perfect? there is not a piece of legislation that ever came through this that is perfect. you cannot deny that obamacare is helping millions of americans here at if you are in chapter and verse i will give it to you. you cannot deny that most employers offer health insurance even without a mandate and small businesses will be exempt. you have no ideas on health reform yourself. those you put before the congress your own party rejected. s.ey cannot have it both way more important, it is better to be right than fast. host: congressman brady, your

response. guest: he is wrong on two counts. the employer mandate is critical to in the same -- critical. , we wereme committee told we were getting obamacare and it was critical, and the new narrative is it really does not matter and everyone has health insurance anyway, which was not the push for health-care reform. the second thing is republicans actually do have ideas, unfortunately, never got a chance -- not one vote for an opportunity to debate another solution. that is one of the reasons we are frustrated, not only with this bill, this massive, unworkable bill, but that the americans should have a choice. host: let's take a call. ask thewhat i wanted to

man that you have their is that why when black folks came into this country we were brought over here to build this country. we did not have a visa or anything else, and now puerto ricans or immigrants or whatever, they have to have this or that. you all's doing. we were forced to come here. why all of a sudden is it so bad when other people are trying to get into this country that this country for white folks? you all want to stop that. something else -- the health- that is supposedou all's to go through, ask california about it, how it is working in

california since you have such a problem. host: let's get a response from congressman kevin brady. proud of the role republicans played in ending slavery in our nation. it was one of the darkest times in this nation, but it is not relevant to this issue. we are a nation of immigrants, but those that have come through the front door of immigration. we want to welcome those pursuing their dream in wanting to contribute to america, and one of the big questions about do we welcomes you because you have a family member here, or is their priority because you have a skill, a contribution you can make to make our country stronger? i think the priority should be thesese skills especially competing withre

economies around the world and we should be welcoming. that is a key issue. host: henderson, nevada. don is a republican. good morning good -- good morning. guest: good morning. set against it as an immigrant, a veteran and a lifelong resident of the united states. i am dead set against making some in that is the legal. -- making something that is illegal. we do not know how many there are in this country. they said 11 million. it is probably closer to 22 million. this administration is upside down. we need jobs for our own citizens in this country, not illegals and if you travel the southwest, you will see a lot of job start taken up by illegals.

they said 11 million. it is probably closer to 22 million. we need to enforce the laws we have on the books, and then as a government be select to as to who we admit and in proportion when i came to this country. guest: there is agreement on the importance of securing the border in a smart way unless we want to look up in 10 years or 15 years and have the exact same problem. i do not think there is disagreement there. it is how do we do that. on the jobs standpoint, we have 21 million people that cannot i'm a full-time job. yes cap -- that can not find a full-time job. yes, there are jobs that are unfilled because deals do not match the. but in -- match them. but in hospitality, low skilled workers, we do not have american stepping up to take those jobs. my thought is let's train americans we have today,

including making commitments on the high-tech side as well, and let's have a guest worker program that fills in the gaps. as a nation, we are not repopulating at the rate that we need. we will need workers over time and the question is how do we fill them and i think there is a smart way to do that. yout: on twitter -- " republicans still discussed the affordable care act being overturned. medicare was overhauled by president bush. aren't changes to laws, and -- common?" guest: they are. this bill was poorly written and was not designed to go into law in this form. so far, we have seen major portions -- the last act was unworkable -- class act was unworkable.

the small business exchanges, which were a big promise, were delayed and they are not ready to go. there are two pillars. the mandate on families and the mandate on companies. one has been delayed out of fairness in coordination. we think pushing back the other as well. i would still like to see a full opportunity to offer a real alternative because next year i think the white house is in disarray. they are in a rush to get this in place and they will do it poorly. "the david milbank in washington post" says "the unqualified opposition by republicans to the health-care law --

you think they would be delighted by this reprieve." can you have it both ways? guest: businesses did not ask for a reprieve, but a repeal. they got a politically convenient reprieve, but the problems are still there. .orkers have their hours cut businesses are not hiring. we heard from a person who has been opening a franchise and-a- half every year for a decade. it stopped because he does not know how to handle the new health-care costs and how to go forward. we see that across the economy. having a healthy discussion on how to make healthcare more affordable, and pointing out that there are real flaws in this ill, that is healthy -- bill, that is healthy as well.

host: congressman brady 's eightts texas district and is also on the ways and means committee and serves as chairman as the health subcommittee. let's go to brian in massachusetts. independent. when all these congressmen grew up, they did not have free trade with china. that is killing us. i do not understand why they are doing that. now they are letting all of so the jobals in, that i left, the legals -- illegals have taken. wast: on trade, when i growing up america was always competing around the world to sell our products. we are very open.

we can go to any mall or store and find low priced choices and high priced choices, but when we compete all wound the world, -- around the world, we see america not welcome. sell in your dates, we are now able to compete with more affordable energy. we see manufacturing in america compete again. , and the mostrgy productive workers on the planet -- it will compete. i worry about isolations, trying to build walls around america will not make a stronger. is a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i have a comment and a question.

full ofnt is texas is people that lack healthcare. there are huge inequalities with wages and low-wage jobs. at best, if texas were a country, it would be something thirdrazil, basically world. guest: you will get a fight on that one. caller: let me finish. republicans have gone from being opposition to being close to being traders. you will undermine this country to score political points. the debt ceiling debate harmed our country. you say you are doing this because you are an opposition, the you have such an historical hate for this president that you are willing to drown us in the bathtub to score political points. host: let the congressman respond. guest: i disagree with almost

every word you said. we think this country is headed in the wrong direction. we think the debt that has been piled up is a drag on our economy. this is the worst recovery in seven years and a lot of families are paying the price. wall street is doing great. joe sixpack, not so great. we think solutions like the health-care law are the wrong solutions because they do not make healthcare more of audible, they just ship -- affordable, they just shift who pays for it. that becauseout texas has a lot of immigrant, a lot of work communities, you are right, we have a lot of people without healthcare, and after the law is in effect, we will still have millions of people without healthcare. across the country, 30 million families will not have healthcare in their household. what i do see in states like

ours and many these days, the economy is improving, we are holding the line on taxes, we see job creation. we would love to see that across more of america. i think our economy and future could be much brighter than what it is today. host: congressman kevin brady, we saw in bernanke make comments yesterday and he said the economy still needs fed stimulus. he knows the unemployment is too high and inflation to law and we need to be more accommodate up. guest: -- accommodative. guest: we are addicted to stimulus right now. here we are four years after the recession and four years into the recovery, and wall street has panicked over every interpretation of chairman ben

bernanke's estimate of where we go forward and when we taper off. the market rallies when the job numbers are weak because they believe the that will keep stimulating the economy. those are not healthy signs. we need to be stronger, much more sustainable at this point. i think it is creating more uncertainty going forward, and you can tell the global markets were rolling for two were three you areed on comments making. we have to get back to fundamentals. host: florida. 01. republican. -- california, owen, republican. caller: i wanted to comment fundamentals. host: florida. 01. republican. on what one caller said.

all men were created equal. we had a civil war. we were all created equal from the beginning of this country. that was a misunderstanding on his part. i had a broken heel bone. i went to the emergency room every they could not even -- emergency room. they could not even give me a bag of ice. they gave me a runaround. i i was looking for financial help and i went to where i public services and i asked if i could get some services because i would not be working, and they told me to buzz off, basically, because my wife works and we were still having tough times. illegal immigrants are outside, with enough money for ice cream cones. this is in california. they have jobs out here. host: we are running low on

time, i just want to take it back to something congress then -- the congressman can respond to. guest: this part is about immigration. their operating machines like they do notand understand you when you tell them to turn it off. owen bringing up the subject of jobs. with thee big problem emergency room is it has been on the front door for not emergency reasons. a lot of america pays for that healthcare. a lot of work has been done to find qualified healthcare clinics that treat people like him in a very cost-effective

manner. you have to provide some money based on your income, but it is extremely affordable. it is actually one of the buck. bangs for our i frankly would like to see more of them because it keeps folks out of the er. .t helps babies you have working families that cannot afford healthcare back could actually get affordable health care. we thought that was one of the alternatives as well. i would like to see us heading in that direction. eight texan is on the line. brian. being that i am a mexican-american, i wanted to talk about immigration and things like that, and i want to

s arehat as long as illegal here, we will have immigrants. security -- this is america. what are you talking about? we had 9/11. the beefed-up security. -- we had eased up security. i feel likeroblem, it is not a problem. we have bigger problems on our hands. the gentleman stated some racist comments that i did not take offense to, but what you want to say about the leak lowers -- leaf blowers and things like that, a lot of americans tend to not put themselves in other people's shoes. people have families. they are trying to raise these kids to be as bright as they can what wese sometimes

have to understand is people work every day. people sacrifice time, everything they have, and why? their kids future. host: let's get a response from congressman brady. guest: i used to represent brian. it is a great community that jonathan lives in. i would actually say that i think america is the most compassionate country in the world. one of the key questions is how do we help families. is it through the government? do you send your money to andington, take your money, choose where those dollars go, or do we find solutions and compassion locally where you have a big say in it through local charitable organizations that you set up?

i think the most effective solutions are occurring at the local level. i would like to see -- we look to washington these days for the solution and all answers, but we ought to be looking more toward our communities, small businesses and charitable organizations. host: congressman kevin brady and that is all we have time for. represent the eighth district of texas. guest: thank you. host: eliot engel joins us next to talk about foreign affairs. first, an update from c-span radio. >> u.s. defense officials say the united states plans to go through with the delivery of evenf-16 fighter jets after the military ouster of mohamed morsi. branding the overthrow a crew would require a halt to the

assistant. the jets are part of the annual aid package. -16's, jay about the f carney said it is our view we should not hastily change our aid programs. strategic and economic talks have yielded greater cooperation on reducing greenhouse gases, but as revealed frustration over cyber attacks the u.s. say emanates from china. john kerry has returned to his wife's bedside in boston as she recovers from a seizure-like episode. his deputy william burns will take his place in today's discussions. an arizona wildfire that killed 19 unique firefighters is now 100% contained.

the first funerals for the fallen members of the granite mountain hotshots began yesterday. they died june 30 when the blaze overran them. wildfire and foreign service officials will testify on ways to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires this morning before the house natural resources subcommittee. you can hear coverage at 10:00 a.m. on c-span radio or watch the hearing on c-span three. those are some of the headlines on c-span radio. "> "washington journal continues. host: democrat of new york, elegant angle joins us. -- eliot engel joins us. here are the headlines. egypt moving to detain the muslim brotherhood.

also the relatively new defense secretary has to deal with what is going on there. what you think should be the u.s. response to egypt? guest: egypt is a very important country. it is the most populous arab country. we have had strong ties for decades. extraordinary.re it is very important. we have to make sure things are right in egypt. we have a stake there. i would like to see return to civilian control as soon as possible, but let's remember mohamed morsi was no friend of the united states, and it turns out he was not even a friend of the egyptian people. , theied to rule by fiat economy was tanking, he was more and more undemocratic. my mother used to have a saying

thomas did not cut off your -- off yourdo not cut nose to spite your face." i think it is important that we continue to have a relationship with them. we cannot turn our backs. we need to be engaged and i support the defense secretary's and the administration's engagement. it is too big to get wrong. host: you have been critical of mohamed morsi and the muslim brotherhood in is this a -- brotherhood. is this a coup and if it is, does it make our laws and procedures in giving them aid? guest: it can be interpreted either way. i look at it as a semantical discussion. we need to continue aid to egypt. if we discontinued, it would be tragic. it would not be in the best interest of the united states of america so we have to figure out a way to continue to aid

egypt. we cannot stop it to egypt. we have to get it right. our plans in the middle east are built upon the united states and our alliance with egypt. egypt has helped us with a lot of things. israel istreaty with a voice of stability in the middle east and we have worked with the egyptians for many years. host: what was your reaction to the news story that at least 51 people were killed and more than 300 were injured when egyptian andce clash with islamists demonstrators. guest: anytime there is a loss of human life, it is a terrible thing. nobody should be happy about it. that is why the united states

needs to be engaged. we can help calm things down. we were not there. we do not know what demonstrato. provoked it, who was wrong and who was not wrong, but i think that short- term things that happened cannot allow us to take our eye off the long-term goals, and that is to have a stable egypt, to have egypt as a strategic partner of the united states, to continue close military to-military ties. we have been doing that for years and they are so important right now. i think we need to work with the egyptians, be there friend and ally, which we are, and continue aid flowing to egypt. host: eliot engel is in his 13th term. task the vice chair of the force on homeland security and the top democrat on the foreign affairs committee. provoked it, who was wrong and who was not wrong,let's go to middleton in t virginia on our democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning, libby.

is it ok for me to make a comment on the health-care law? i try to get on with brady. host: congressman eliot angle and feel that for you. , i was when i retired not given health care. i was without health insurance until i turned 65. the company i have now, my supplement to my medicare, they turned the and my wife down five times because of pre-existing conditions, and now they are my supplement because i am on medicare. they automatically cover me. he talks about doing away with the health-care law. i cannot believe it. let him go out and try to buy some insurance. the insurance is a joke. you have to pay a great big deductible or the insurance is not worth a dime.

host: we saw the story in "the new york times" the democrats are shrugging off delays in affirming support for the health-care law. congress and eliot engel, how big of a setback was it to see the administration put on hold the law? guest: let me say i agree with the caller 100%. he is a poster child for why we need healthcare reform and that is why we need this bill. there have been so many scare tactics and outright distortions, no wonder people are scared or really do not know. this gentleman that just called in is the perfect example of why we need national healthcare. it is a big bill. there will be some kinks in the bill and we need to adjust them as they unfold. this has been true of any major legislation that has been , whether the congress it was the civil rights act of

the 1960s, or medicare, or medicaid originally or social security. we have to see how it goes, and tweak it here at that is what the -- it. that is what the administration is trying to do. you cannot have it both ways. people that oppose say what a burden it would be to impose it sosmall businesses in 2014, the administration postpones it a year to address those charges, and they criticized the administration for postponing it very we have -- post owning it. -- postponing it. wes is an attempt to say want to see most americans insured. we do not want insurance companies to deny people insurance because of a pre- existing condition or a cap.

we want to have young people stay on their parents health insurance and we have now until 26. will there be problems? sure. we will have to see what needs to be changed, but the very people that would like to kill it, and say the president should delay it, now criticize it if it is delayed. you are dammed if you do, dammed if you do not. this is an attempt by the administration to be fair, listen to the criticisms and say maybe we need an extra gear to work up the difficulties. host: gaithersburg, maryland. john is a republican. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have three points. with regards to foreign aid and egypt, times change, situations change. you talk about continuity in giving aid to egypt. there are a lot of people in

this country that have to make personal decisions and cut back due to the economy. i would like to have you address -- we need to have a more of a return on investment perspective. what are the alternatives between putting that money in egypt versus putting that money in this country? --ondly, then matter narrative around the 11 million immigration, and on the other side we have health care. the math does not work if we let the love and million people or more in this country, most of which would not have health care, those numbers do not work to make us afford obamacare at the levels that it is funded today. could you please address that. guest: let me just say that total foreign aid, everything we do around the world is less than 1% of our total budget. it is a very low figure. we are a leader of the free world, and with that, we have

responsibilities and it is in our national interest to have allies around the world, and certainly in important countries like egypt. we could always say, well, what are we taking money for and using it abroad -- let's use it internally. that gets a good applause, but the truth is we need balanced policies that spend on domestic the rams and policies that make sure that -- domestic programs and policies that make sure we are around the world. i think less than 1% of our total budget, i do not think it is excessive at all. again, talking about immigration reform, we are looking at the senate bill. we do not know what the house is going to do.

speaker john boehner says he will not allow the senate bill come up for a vote on the floor of the house. the bottom line is we have 11 million undocumented people. they are not going back. we can have them continue to live here on the sidelines of society and make it miserable for them and their families and pretend they are not here, yet we use them to do jobs that nobody else wants to do, go out to any suburb in the united states and look who is taking care of people's lawns and things like that, and you will know it is among the 11 million that are undocumented. we need to find a way to make these people become citizens. i personally feel the senate bill is. cover -- is a good compromise. it beats up border security, makes people wait 13 years before they become citizens.

if we gave them healthcare, i guess people would complain. if you do not give them healthcare, people complain. i think we need to face reality. bordersto beef up our and make sure the mistakes we made in the past did not happen, but the 11 million that are your, the dreamers, -- that are here, dreamers, were brought here through no fault of their own and grew up as americans, we should look to make them citizens and give them a normal life. i think it's good for them and the united states. and says ifeets in to egypt and they are used to suppress them and traders, do we become responsible -- demonstrators, do

we become responsible? guest: we have a responsibility to speak with our friends and allies in egypt and tell them when we are concerned about things, and i think we are doing that. i do not want our money to go to oppress anyone, but on the other hand you could make it clear case that it was the muslim brotherhood,, morsi that was repressing his people and others. we have an interest there. we have to weigh it. nothing is black and white. they are all shades of gray. the bottom line is egypt is an important country. we need to work with them, hold their hand, be friends and supporters and we need to keep the close military-to-military ties that we have. it is like your family. when you think your family is right, he tell them. we think they are doing something wrong, you tell them, to. i do not think that should

change our long-standing commitment to the alliance between egypt and the united states had host: -- united states. host: rapid city, south carolina. good morning. caller: i wanted to ask representative eliot engel to take a couple of suggestions back to congress. on immigration, every time they talk about immigration the only talk about hispanics. we have immigrants from africa, -- middle east, europe, asia all types of people in this country. when you are talking about immigration reform, talk about all of them, not just hispanics. it might take a different on your immigration bill -- make a difference on your immigration bill. number two, insurance companies -- you want to change healthcare in this country -- we

used to have monopoly and antitrust laws. insurance companies are exempt from trust laws. make them non-exempt. , our healthcare care system will change dramatically if you do that. these are just suggestions that maybe you could talk to the people in congress. host: ok, barbara. guest: many years ago when i was in college i went cross country with two friends and we were in , and i have great memories of that beautiful place. that is what i thought of when i heard them say you lived in rapid city area we are -- city. we are a sickly a nation of immigrants. unless you are an american

indian, we are all immigrants. bornur grandparents were in eastern europe could they came -- europe. they came hundred years ago. people wanted to come to this country because there are so many opportunities for people. you are right. it is not only latinos. is people coming from all over the world. in terms of the insurance companies, insurance companies fought the health care act to fan mail because what we were andng to do is get -- tooth nail because what we were trying to do is get health care costs under control, and basically we do not want a situation where insurance companies could collude among themselves and tell you what premiums they are charging, and you do not have any ability to bring the premiums down. the whole purpose of the health- , to law was, first of all make sure that we did not continue to have 50 million

americans that were uninsured, but also to bring down the cost and the premiums. that is what we are trying to do. it will take work. it will not be easy, but i believe it is doable and it will be good for the american people ultimately, and i wish people would stop scaring other people about it because after several years have passed, most americans will agree health-care reform will be a good thing, not a bad thing. host: congressman eliot engel sits on the energy and commerce committee and is the ranking democrat on foreign affairs. let's look at syria. that oney" reports month after the u.s. said they would supply weapons to rebels there are few signs they are getting their. the story goes on to speculate how the weapons could get into the control of bashar al-assad.

terms of arming rebels, do you support that, and how is the foreign affairs committee influencing this? guest: i support arming well- embedded rebels -- well- vetted rebels.ll- they are the ones we should be arming. i understand there are risks. we are faced in syria with all dad choices. there are no good choices. we have a humanitarian crisis and that is important that we step in and prevent that. bashar al-assad has murdered 100,000 of his people. there are 2 million syria refugees in other countries, destabilizing them -- lebanon, jordan. in the area, there are 7 million displaced syrians.

this is a humanitarian crisis. that is the reason to get involved. the other reason to get involved is it is in the u.s. strategic interest. who is backing the regime in syria? iran. they are terrorizing the people of lebanon. the recent gains that bashar al- assad has had on the truth -- ground has been is the lead troops. the iranians are watching what we do in syria to see what kind of result we had in terms of preventing them from having a nuclear weapon. -- resolve we have in terms of preventing them from having a nuclear weapon. them arms.iving i think foreign policy should be bipartisan, and there are

risks. i also think the administration needs to talk to more committees in congress about what they are doing, not just the intelligence committee -- committee, affairs other committees really need to know and i think the administration should do that. i was glad when president obama and the administration said they would arm the rebels i support that -- and i support that. host: do you expect that it will happen soon? how held up is this? guest: to say it is classified and therefore we will only deal with the intelligence committee is the wrong thing to do. i think we will get weapons to the rebels and will find a way to to it.

congress needs to be consulted. i think it would be a tremendous mistake to hold it up and allow bashar al-assad to win with and ands -- with iran's hezbollah's backing. in world war ii, there was talk about appeasing hitler, and they try to appease him for a while and it only brought them more trouble later on. sometimes you need to stand up, and i think this is the time we need to stand up. we cannot allow iran to have a nuclear weapon because it iran has a nuclear weapon, it egypt, turkey, the united arab emirates and saudi arabia would have nuclear weapons quickly after that. a nuclear-armed and ran it the next essential -- iran is a

nexus potential threat. ,ost: congressman eliot engel democrat of new york. revisiting the 16th district. -- representing the 16th district. dina, to get see, new york. dina, new york. i think because the approval rating is so low, i feel like when we ask questions, we are shot down, and that set of when tigers -- congress refuses to look at overwhelming evidence that explosions destroyed tower 11. host: where are you getting your information from?

caller: there are papers that are not refuted. guest: i will refuted. i 9/11, we know what happened -- people went into the world trade center, hijacked two planes, saudi arabia and 3000ic rebels and killed people in my home city. these other theories might sound intriguing, but they have no basis. host: how much do you hear people talking about this, and would you think it comes from? guest: i do not hear a lot of that, but it comes from the fact that people want to believe what they want to believe. there is nothing i have read, heard or seen that would indicate that anything short of those given you will planes that killed 2000 innocent people -- nothing else did that. it was the evil hijacking of those airplanes.

host: centreville, virginia. republican caller. caller: good morning. let me give you a background about myself. i am an american, a u.s. navy veteran from egyptian origins. i have a message for you to take back to congress, the foreign relations committee, and it is three main points. i would ask you to be patient as i make my points. the first point, what has taken place in egypt now is definitely not a coup. i do not understand where the media here, especially cnn, is getting their facts from, but when you have at least 22 million people taking to the street to get back there revolution, which was stolen by the muslim brotherhood, and these people are asking them army or the military in egypt

to stand by their side, this is not a clue. the army was asked to -- coup. the army was asked to stand by their side because it is the only standing, properly functioning institution in egypt. the muslim brotherhood did amazing work in dismantling all of egypt's institutions. they dismantled the police force. they are leading the wild assault on judges and the law. they shoved a constitution that represented their interest down the throat of many egyptians. the egyptians have only the army to ask for help, and the army did what they were supposed to do, taking the side of the people here at you have -- people. you have 22 million people in the streets, that is not a coup. host: your next two point weekly, because we are running short on time or at -- time.

caller: the u.s. is made -- missing a golden chance. the support that we gave them was too much. host: last point? caller: the u.s. ambassador to egypt needs to go because she has done a horrible job representing this country in egypt. host: congressman eliot engel. guest: i agree with much of what you said, not everything. i do not care whether we call it a coup or not. it is a semantical argument. i agree that we need to remain engaged in egypt. i agree with what the caller said about mama morsi and the muslim brotherhood destroying the -- morsi and the muslim theherhood destroying

constitution in egypt. i think the united states needs to let the egyptian people know we are on their side and we are constantly monitoring the situation and helping them. as i said before, the alliance between egypt and the u.s. is an important alliance and we need to do everything we can in the future to make sure the alliance is stable. it is good for the united states and for egypt. the muslim brotherhood was not democratic. as for the people of egypt to decide, but personally, i do not shed any tears over the fact that morsi in the muslim brotherhood are no longer in power in egypt. host: greg in carrollton, virginia. independent line. caller: america should the the breadbasket of the world, not the arsenal. foreign aid should consist of fruits and vegetables. money can be spent on weapons

and you cannot control where weapons wind up. we should have learned the lesson in afghanistan when shoulder fired missiles were used again our own troops. the bottom line is you cannot kill with fruits and vegetables. let's combine the farm bill with foreign aid. no subsidies should begin to vegetables.arvest , excessizens are fed fruits and vegetables should be sent overseas as foreign aid. food being also for sent abroad. i do not know with the gentleman knows the united states is by far and away the leading supplier of food all around the world, even in countries with which we have contentious relations with like north korea. we are largely responsible for

feeding people around the world, and we just had an amendment, unfortunately, not to pass on failedor, my amendment, by a few votes to try to see if the food we purchase to feed people abroad can be purchased in those countries because we think it would help the economy in those countries as well, the cheaper and get more food to starving people. i think the united states is a good job in terms of meeting people and it is not -- feeding people. n either or situation. i wish we did not have to do things in a military way, but unfortunately we do. it is not an either/or. we can help people with food, and also make sure that we attacked our people and allies. host: fox news reports that publicans have dropped food

stamps from the massive farm bill. does this have a chance, and where does it go from here? guest: the bill that went crashing down on the floor -- and things do not usually go crashing down on the floor. they usually hold the bill. leadership that they had the votes, and last week or the week before it came crashing down. we objected to the foodstamp provision because they were cutting back on food stamps, which is awful. we have a lot of people hurting, and to be punitive to these people it is the wrong thing to do. if you pull food stamps out of the agricultural bill, you determine whether or not you're funding things that adequate levels and there are other considerations. i do not think there will be much support on the democratic side for the farm bill because i

, with -- theblem way the problem with most bills for they are underfunded, programs that we feel strongly about, and the bottom line is we passed these appropriation bills. we never get our act together with them, and that we put everything in a continuing resolution. i want to see real negotiation between the house and the senate. i want to see an end to the sequester, which is this the biggest thing -- the most stupid thing congress has done in a long time. congress ought to be making tough choices about what programs to cut, not have a one- size-fits-all, chopping every program with the same percentage meat cleaver. that is not why people sent this to congress.

it means there needs to be give and take on both sides, and from what i have seen, we have people in the house -- tea party republicans, who refused to compromise and negotiate. it is sort of my way or the highway, and that is why the approval rating of congress is slow -- so low. we have to push toward the middle and find common ground. that is what the american people want us to do. each side has to give, each side has to get, the we have to do something, not just have a sequester that murders programs and causes low levels in appropriation bills and causes us to end programs that we know are helping kids, causing student loans to double, and things like that. congress really should stop doing what it is doing and sit down and come up with a grand -- plan,road planned

that maybe nobody would be completely happy with, but understand it is good for our country. host: representative eliot engel searching his 13th term in congress, democrat from new york. he spent time in the assembly and was a teacher and guidance counselor in the new york of the school system. -- democrat, california. guest: hello. i want to say i am a liberal democrat and i want to thank you for your service. it must be beyond frustrating to serve in the u.s. house of representatives when the majority really has no desire to govern. but take the immigration bill for example. immigration will passed in the senate -- bill passed in the senate is terrible legislation because of the demands of the republicans. ,ne instance, -- for instance

the 11 million undocumented workers need to wait 13 years before they can file for citizenship? we need to put 10,000 troops on the order? -- border? ?mployee more drones more high surveillance equipment? we need to build 750 more miles of order. we are going to spend $3 billion $30 $30 billion on border billion security when the republicans want to cut $40 million from food stamps. congressman eliot engel? guest: i understand your frustration here at -- frustration. i think the senate bill was a compromise, and in a compromise

you do not get everything you want. that was the attempt to work that out. the problem is the house republicans do not like the senate bill. all of the things you find objectionable in the senate bill, they want to worsen it from your point of view and i think that is a very real problem. we have 11 million undocumented people. they are not going back, and we soht to see what we can do they can work their way towards being citizens. i think that will help this country. in terms of border security, if that is the price we have to pay to get an immigration ill, i am for -- bill, i am for it. in a situation where people do not want to agree with you, you have to swallow some pills you do not like. if we were to get immigration reform, we ought to embrace it,

swallow the things that we do not like, but for the greater good, we move on and people from the opposite point of view take the same tactic. they do not like making the undocumented people citizens, even if it takes 12 or 13 years, and i agree, it is an awfully long and ridiculous time, but at least it is doing it. it is a compromise. ,ost: congressman eliot engel one minute left, this last week -- "how can the president choose which parts of the healthcare law to delay or approve -- and force without congressional approval?" guest: it is a good question, but the problem is we have voted something like 37 times in the house to repeal the healthcare bill, and i think the administration feels they will never get a fair shake on

health care law in the house and it will be delayed and delayed. the republicans that do not like the healthcare law cannot have it all ways. i cannot say it is a terrible bill and it should be repealed or delayed, and when they delay it, they say how terrible it is and you need our approval. i think the president is doing the best with what he has, the healthcare bill will be good, and the american people when they see how it works, will decide they like it and it will be good for most people in this country. , democrat ofngel new york, representing the 16th district. thank you for your time. guest: it has been a pleasure. host: that is all for "washington journal." thank you for joining us. we go to the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., july 11,

2013. i hereby appoint the honorable mark meadows to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by the guest chaplain, reverend dr. paul binon from west side church of god, fresno, california. the chaplain: let us pray. our father and strong god, for this day and the privileges and opportunities it brings, we say thank you. may this day not be typical, ordinary in any way, but one that will long be remembered because of what shall transpire in this house. decisions settled, issues resolved, progress made, partisanship minimized and personal agendas set aside for the good of our constituency.

god, we acknowledge our need of you and for your wisdom and guidance. keep us mindful that we serve a people, community and world that is looking and depending on us to do always what is best for them. and may we live always cognizant of what you expect from us today and that is to do justly, love mercy and walk humbly with you. this we ask in the name of jesus christ. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. >> mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule 1, i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the

journal. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. mr. thompson: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from wittman. mr. mr. wittman: ladies and gentlemen, please join me in the pledge of allegiance to the united states of america. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the

gentleman from california, mr. costa, is recognized for one minute. r. costa: thank you very much, mr. speaker. since 1977, pastor paul binon has stood at the helm of one of fresno's most vibrant church, the west side church of god, and the wonderful congregation that he serves. from offering comfort to families during challenging times to taking a lead on issues impacting the economically disadvantaged in our economy, pastor binon has truly left a mark and continues to in our community. he's urged his congregation beyond just knowing the gospel but by living them by performing good works for those in need. over nearly 10 years i've known aul, i know that he cares. he's overseen efforts to foster interfaith and interchurch dialogue by serving at the head of the west fresno minute tearial alliance, because he

knows our faith communities have much more in common than whatever divides them. i'm proud to call pastor binon my friend and thank him for his wise words this morning. paul, thank you for joining us today to remind us that service, service that we all involve ourselves with daily on behalf of our constituents is the highest calling and must remain the center of our work. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair will entertain five further requests for five-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. wittman: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one inute. mr. wittman: mr. speaker, instead of combating terrorism or working to support our troops around the globe, civilian workers across the country are instead spending 20% of their workweek on a

forced furlough. furloughed workers face personal challenges, lost income to get the same amount of work done. from the associated press, civilian employees ranging from top-level policy advisors to school teachers and depo workers will not be answering their phones or responding to emails for one day a week. there's no doubt those who wish harm upon the united states are pleased with these cuts. the administration had flexibility to make other choices and avoid furloughs. further, this unfortunate choice may not be over on september 30. yesterday, secretary hagel suggested furloughs may continue under certain circumstances. compounding budget cuts are devastating military readiness. i urge the administration to make better choices and for the congress to work the will of the american people and support our nation's defense to the fullest. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house

for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. speak out once again against the sequestration -caused furloughs that are punishing workers i represent in illinois. ms. -- mrs. bustors: furloughs will begin unnecessarily, hurting working families across the country. i've repeatedly called on the defense department to use flexibility that congress gave it without resorting to furloughs. as i travel around my district of illinois, i hear story after story of families who are impacted by these cuts. people like tom and michelle vetter who both work at the rock island arsenal and will see a 30% cut in their expected income. they now fear being able to pay their mortgage and now sending their son to college.

and people like der lien who's worked at the rock -- darlene who's worked at the rock island arsenal who is putting off her well-deserved retirement. we need to get our fiscal house in order, no doubt about it, but it should not be at the expense of the jobs of our hardworking citizens and their ability to support their families. please, let's come together to cut spending without harming our nation's economy and our workers. mr. speaker, i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. walberg: mr. speaker, the president's decision last week to delay obamacare's employer mandate underscored how this law is far too complicated and expensive. worse yet, it fails michigan families and businesses. while this will certainly help our job creators in the short term without a delay or better yet a repeal of the individual

mandate, the administration deliberately chose to leave the american people out in the cold. this delay creates even more confusion for michigan families who are wondering if they will lose their current coverage, be forced into choosing different providers or be burdened with new high costs. it becomes clearer and clearer that without repeal this law will continue to destroy jobs and slow down our economy. nstead, we need to return to patient-centered care and not the government knows best health care system. i look forward to continuing work with my colleagues in the house to revive our economy, create jobs and put people first so they can make their own health care decisions. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: do you ask unanimous consent? mr. butterfield: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the

gentleman is recognized for one minute. r. butterfield: mr. speaker, shame on the republican majority, shame on you. the rules committee met last night and is sending us a rule today that has attached to it a bill we have not seen and have not been able to read. they call it the farm bill. but it appears that in this farm bill they have stripped away the nutrition title from the bill. mr. speaker, for years and years we have combined nutrition assistance to support for farmers and ranchers, but this is a rush job. democrats and the congressional black caucus are appalled that the republicans are determined to defund food stamps and place vulnerable americans in a position of not being able to feed their families. shame on you. you've removed food stamps, the snap program from this legislation. i don't know where it's going to go. it looks like it's going to die a slow death. it's despicable. what is it about poor people you don't like? what is it? tell us today what is it about poor people you don't like and

you don't want to feed their families? i have the fourth poorest district in the nation. we do not like it. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. >> nervous, concerned, complex, train wreck, third world experience. mr. williams: these are used by the authors of obamacare to describe their very own creation. mr. speaker, these aren't new concerns. these are concerns shared by families and businesses across the nation ever since then-speaker nancy pelosi rushed the bill through congress so we could see what's in it. now that the democrats and the president can see what's in it, they don't like it either. as a business owner and job creator over 30 years, i know a business can no longer hire and take risks that can't grow the economy. the employer machine date of health insurance is not what this needs.

this complex government joan haul will cause. young professionals, senior citizens, all americans deserve a protection from this law and its mandates. the skyrocketing premiums and shrinking of plans, not just for one year but permanently. let's fully repeal the nightmare of obamacare. it doesn't work and it won't work. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from florida seek recognition? without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for ne minute. ms. wilson: mr. speaker, snap, food stamps, however you phrase it, it's fundamental to the nutritional supplement of millions of americans. black, white, feeble seniors, struggling mothers, disabled veterans and hungry children. mr. speaker, it was reported to

me that there are seniors in my district who eat dog food when their food stamps run out. i was appalled and went to see for myself, and i was dumbfounded. i fixed the situation, but i'm in america ewhere today some poor soul is relying on dog food to take them through the month. mr. speaker, please do not hurt or destroy what is a main stay in the lives of so many americans who are just trying to get by. do not remove nutrition, including the food stamp program, from the farm bill. it's wrong, it's punitive and it's cruel. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore:

without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, today i rise before my colleagues with an important piece of bipartisan legislation that will be introduced later today called the all-children acak. al, or it's how funding formulas are calculated among the primary and secondary act. it is to allocate more children for title 1 students, local education agencies with high concentrations of poverty. it waives students in the l.e.a. it has the perverse effect of directing funding away from smaller school districts towards larger l.e.a.'s regardless of the poverty rate. it will gradually decrease the number those waiting and return to the areas with the highest concentration of poverty as originally intended under the law. mr. speaker, i'm proud to have

representative slaughter of new york join me in introducing this important bill. i encourage my colleagues to join us in correcting this fundamental injustice. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker, i stand here today in dismay and disgust. miss beat -- mrs. beatty: i stand here on the floor where we have the words in god we trust, where we say the pledge of allegiance, where my colleagues come to this podium and use words like train wreck and work in bipartisan fashion in the same minute. and then today we are confronted with removing snap dollars from

the farm bill. i came here to work on a compromise, and when we say that members of this great congressional black caucus, and democratic caucus, stand together because we want america to know that we stand for poor families, black and white, urban, suburban, and, yes, rural. ask you to take note today, mr. speaker, that republicans dare come to this floor and tell us that we want to serve the people. aren't our children, aren't our mothers and families part of the people? yes, we stand for snap. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, last week the

president quietly decided to delay a major part of what many media pundits consider his crowning achievement, obamacare. the president is telling businesses that they will be given a year reprieve from complying with obamacare's onerous and costly employer mandate. the president is once again picking which laws his administration enforces and which ones he chooses not to. mr. johnson: he's also picking inners and losers again. employers will have another year to comply with the employer mandate, but president obama has decided that individuals, the middle class, will not be given more time to comply with the individual mandate. meanwhile, the economy continues to limp along with businesses large and small, afraid to hire more workers because the cost of doing business continues to go up without a clear end in sight. high taxes, enormous tax burdens, and the specter of

obamacare continue to hang over them like a storm cloud. for the good of our nation, obamacare must be repealed and replaced. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from alabama seek recognition? ms. sewell: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. sewell: mr. speaker, i rise today to express my great disappointment in my republican colleagues for bringing a version of the farm bill that does not include nutrition assistance. you know, i joined this great august body. i was a member of the agriculture committee. agriculture committee time and time again re-authorized the farm bill bipartisanship was always the hallmark. this is not the hallmark of what we as americans stand for. our minister today just stood up here and in prayer we said we would walk justly, that we will do and love mercifully, and we would be humble before god.

if we are truly have those words mean something in america, we must take care of our working families, our needy families, our children, in addition to our farmers. the farmers i represent in alabama do not want a farm bill that does not include nutrition assistance. we cannot provide government subsidies to farmers without providing government assistance to people in poverty. it is not what we as americans stand for. if we have no further business in this august body this week, we should go home. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the the gentlewoman from alabama seek recognition? a see well: i move the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the aye vs. it. ms. sewell: i ask for a recorded

vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman -- the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of the vote by yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 125. the noes are 260. the motion is not adopted. he house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, good morning, by direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 295 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 41, house resolution 295. resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the house the bill, h.r. 2642, to provide for the reform and continuation of agricultural and other programs at the department of

agriculture through fiscal year 2018, and for other purposes. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and on any amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one, one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on agriculture. and two, one motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one hour. mr. sessions: thank you very much, mr. speaker. for the purpose of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from worcester, massachusetts, my friend, mr. mcgovern, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman virginia tech. mr. sessions: during consideration of this resolution, all time is yielded for the purpose of debate only. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. sessions: mr. speaker, house resolution 295 provides for a closed rule for consideration of h.r. 2642. however, i think it's important to recognize that while the rule before us today is closed, this legislation, exactly the legislation, has gone through an amendment process on this floor, was debated just a few weeks ago. debated, discussed, and voted on. the amendments which were agreed to as a result of that process are in this underlying legislation. mr. speaker, the bill before us today is the exact same language that this body considered in june with two important considerations. and exceptions. unlike last month, this legislation contains a repeal of the 1949 backstop, which means we will do farm bill

away with that 1949 law. s the backstop to the farm products and legislation. however, it does not include the nutrition programs from the previous bill. you will hear that today. on the other hand, however, this bill does include the exact same language as the previous bill included adopted amendments. since the house considered a farm bill last month, there's been a great deal of deliberation -- mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. he house will be in order. mr. sessions: since the house considered the farm bill last

month, there's been a great deal of deliberation and many conversations, including today with members, that have raised significant concerns with the language as it was previously drafted. the chief concern was the inclusion of the nutrition policy in the agriculture bill. therefore, after careful consideration of all aspects of the issue, the decision was made to consider nutrition and agriculture policy separately. however, i want to be clear, removing the nutrition provisions from this legislation in no way seeks to marginalize the importance of the nutrition are ams, nor in any effort we trying to make to avoid their re-authorization. anything that would be said on this floor contrary to that simply would not be true. i think you would be hard-pressed to find any member,

republican or democrat, who does not think that these programs are vitally important. in particular to women and children. they simply will be considered separately and not in this bill. now, the prack at this cality to this, mr. speaker, is and was discussed last night in the rules committee. and that is that if it is not in this title, and it is not, and if the house does not move forward on a nutrition or snap program, then all of these items still go to conference with the united states senate. and it is contained within the senate bill and would be fully operational, debatable, and decisions can be made in that conference. in that conference it is fully

authorized t. and the house would simply not have taken a position. to assume or to say that we are trying to move a bill without nutrition and to take things away would not be truthful. to say that we would show up at conference without a position of the house of representatives, would be truthful. republicans and democrats, including leadership of both parties, understand and recognize that nutrition and nutrition programs are an essential part of not just government services but an essential part of a civilization that we agree with as part of the programs from the united states government. o in no way, in no way is this

to be a trick or to be seen that we would not believe -- would believe that we would show up to do anything to the nutrition program. it would be stated that the house would show up without a position on those issues which would mean, in reality, that the current law would prevail. the house would show up with no position to change any of these items related to food stamps, nd thus it would stay as is. so for someone to suggest that republicans are not going to be supportive of the nutrition programs would simply not, in my opinion, be fairly spoken of.

the house will have an opportunity, however, once we get this done, to move forward a bill that, if a decision was made, could move to conference. today's legislation is an important step in making sure that the agriculture programs providing american farmers with risk management tools and so many other things that have been placed in this bill on a bipartisan basis, as a result of the work that began with then democrat chairman, collin peterson, when the bill began its writing process and has continued on a bipartisan basis with the gentleman, mr. lucas, the chairman of the committee, and that what is what we are trying to present today. the bill which we are presenting today has every consideration that i believe is necessary and

important about why this house should move forward and support this legislation. legislation is common sense, fiscally responsible, and it's a solution to answers that are in the marketplace. i urge my colleagues to understand not only what we stated today, but which was testimony last night in an agreement in the rules committee. i support the underlying legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield to the gentleman from north carolina for a unanimous consent request. mr. watt for a yeak. the speaker pro tempore: is recognized. mr. watt: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in opposition to the rule, which prohibits offering amendments that would protect the children

f america from hunger. the speaker pro tempore: the chair would ask members to confine unanimous consent requests to simple declarative statements of the members' attitudes towards this measure. further embellishments will result in the reduction of time from the yielding. without objection, so ordered. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield to the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings, for a unanimous consent request. mr. hastings: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in very strong opposition to the farm bill rule and underlying bill because it takes the safety net away from america's poor families. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman's time will be charged. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield to the gentleman from new york, mr. rangel, for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rangel: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in strong opposition to the farm bill rule and the underlying bill because it hurts america's

children. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman's time will be charged. the gentleman from massachusetts. the gentleman will state his inquiry. mr. hastings: why that that is beyond the boundaries the clarity you say one must also when he or she is in opposition to the rule? the speaker pro tempore: the members must limit their motion to simple declarative statements. any other embellishment will be charged. the gentleman will state his inquiry. >> mr. speaker, the speaker has enunciated the rule. a simple declare torrey statement. mr. hoyer: clearly mr. hastings made a simple, declare torrey statement, as to why he was

opposed and it seems to clearly fall within the am bant within the contell playive statement a member can make without time being charged. he chair has, however, articulated the fact that without objection the gentleman's time will be charged. if that is subject to an objection, which i think it probably is not, i would object. but i will also appeal the ruling of the chair if the chair continues that ruling and we will have a vote on that. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will evaluate each declarative statement individually. the gentleman's point is -- mr. hoyer: i thank the speaker for his observation. i would hope the declare torrey statement, similar to the one being made by mr. hastings, will clearly not as historically in so, count s not been against the time of the gentleman from massachusetts. i thank the speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from masses mass. mr. mcgovern: i yield to the gentlewoman from california, ms. lee, for a unanimous consent

request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. ms. lee: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in strong opposition to the farm bill rule and the underlying bill because it increases hunger in america. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield to the gentleman from man men, mr. ellison, for a unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. ellison: mr. speaker, i ask for unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in strong opposition to the farm bill rule and the underlying bill because it increases hunger in america. . the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield to the gentleman from maryland, mr. cummings, for unanimous consent request. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cummings: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in strong opposition to the farm bill rule and the underlying bill because it takes the safety net away from america's poor families. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i yield to the gentlewoman from florida, ms. brown, for unanimous consent