leadership program held annually in washington, tonight at 8:00 on c-span's "q&a >> joining us from claremont california on "newsmakers" is the president and founder of nexgen simon. thank you for being with us. joining us with the questioning from politico and john sullivan from the washington post. let me begin with a broad issue of climate change and global warming. are we experiencing that today in the u.s. and around the world? >> we are. there is no doubt that the climate is changing and has been changing for a number of years. you can see it both in the measurements that they have been taken rigorously over the last number of decades and also in the increasing number of events that are taking place largely in the

water related events, whether they be floods or droughts or things like hurricane katrina or superstorm sandy. >> temperature changes. are we experiencing that? a number of studies conflict that we are facing global warming today. quite i did not think that is true. the studies also show that the temperatures are rising. i think you are referring to the fact they have not risen that much over the last decade. scientists talk a lot about why that is true. when we talk about climate change, people are focused very heavily on the temperature in the air. there are a number of different ways in which climate change happens. even when the temperature has leveled off in the air, it would explain this a variety of ways, the temperatures in the oceans have continued to rise. the melting around the poles has continued much faster than scientists predict.

factly how this happening is a matter of some debate. whether and that it is happening is not a matter of debate. it is not a question of conflict. >> thank you for doing this. i wanted to ask you about the midterm election. you said you're going to spend up to $100 million in 2014, $50 million of your own money. can you give us a sense of how you are going to spend the money? >> i actually never said that. it has been widely attributed to me. we do expect to be heavily involved in the midterm elections. we are looking for elections that have three characteristics. where there is a significant difference between the candidates in terms of their position on climate. whether there's something important of the election and of itself so we can see a substantive change as a result

of it. lastly, a change where there will be a longer-term impact not just in terms of the immediate substantive changes in an energy efficiency role but also longer-term changes in the way the country thinks about energy and climate. >> have you decided on specific races you would like to get involved in? are you disputing this igure? >> what i said was that seems like a pretty cheap figure if you are really talking about changing the united states on what i think is the most important uestion facing us. >> can we really get the united states to understand how important this question is? if you said to me, if you look at the polls right now, that most americans, two thirds of americans, agree that the

climate is changing, that it is caused by human activity in the kind of policies that have orked with pollution are probably the things we should do. about two thirds of americans agree. when they are asked to rate how important that question is to them, they do not read it very highly. if you said to me how much would i be willing to spend to make this what i believe it is, the most important issue in the minds of americans, then i think 100 million bucks would be very low. >> would you go to half a million? can you put a cap on it? >> you tend to think about this in the specific way. my experience of political campaigns is the kind of budgeting you're talking about is pretty unrealistic. the way that things happen in

politics, and i am no professional. in my limited experience of olitics if you think you can script what is going to happen, your kind of nuts. if you cannot accept that you ill be pretty unrealistic. >> thanks. the obama administration recently announced that it is putting off a decision on the keystone xl pipeline until after the midterm elections. how does this change your strategy when you approach the midterm elections?

>> i do not think they said they were putting off until after the midterm elections. i think they said they were going to put off the decision until they have all the information and have a definite route through nebraska. in terms of what it means for us, i do not think it changes much. when we are thinking about states, we are trying to support people who are going to be pushing thoughtful, innovation faced energy solutions. that is still going to be rue. > in terms of specific races, we have seen reports about the florida governor race and the governor race in iowa, what other ones are on your radar?

>> we're definitely looking at those two very specifically. we have said that publicly. we have not gone the other races that are expecting to be involved in. my guess is we will end up being involved in eight or more races. those two are obvious ones. they meet all the criteria that i gave you earlier in terms of what would be an important race for us. there are going to be a number of other races around the country as a developed. in our times they really don't know who the candidates are. >> when do you expect to announce his other races? >> i would think when the candidates are clear and we start to get into the june timeframe, then we are going to have to solidify in our minds what we're guessing is going to happen but with the full information. >> you said you are willing to support opponents of the keystone pipeline. can you expand on that? would you be willing to upport

a candidate like mark udall who has not really staked out a clear position on the ipeline? >> let me start with your first question. supporting people who are going to come under attack. one of the things that is really true in american politics is that group go after people who ake principled stands. it made it difficult for the politicians who want to stand up and do the right thing to do that thinking that they are going to be targeted by groups who disagree with them. unless the people who agree with them also show up and have their back and stand up for them, then american politics becomes a very dangerous place for people who have high principles. we want to stand up for people who do the right thing. the second question i think

you asked was whether we would support a candidate who had not officially opposed the keystone pipeline. of course, we're going to support people who are strong advocates of progressive energy policy. we are going to take a holistic view and try to make sure the people who we support are going to be doing the right thing down the road. and also sending a message that people who do the right thing are going to win. it is important for people around the united states to understand that americans when they understand this issue will vote the way we think is appropriate and sensible given the importance of the issue. >> so far your super pack has been largely self-funded. you express an interest in talking to other donors to make money from outside groups. how is that going? >> i definitely cannot give you the names of people unless they release it, which we have not.

we have gotten a handful of people to give pretty significant amounts of money. we have also gone out more broadly. what is important is that this not be a one-man band. i do not want people to think this is something centered around me. i am one of the people who cares a lot about this issue. i really want to be one of the foot soldiers in this movement to make this a central issue in america and to make sure that americans understand how important it is. from my point of view, getting the money is really important for a variety of reasons but mostly so people understand this is a broad-based movement and not a pet project of one human. >> let me ask you about two specific races in two states. kentucky with coal in louisiana with oil and natural gas. he is likely to challenge mitch mcconnell.

>> we have not been involved neither of those states. i do not have enough information to make a decision about either something substantive and how it changes for the long run. this'll be natural. if they are not, then we will not do it. >> you have been criticized on

the right in a similar way to the way democrats criticized the koch brothers. is that something that you embrace? >> no. that is not something i embrace. i think there are real distinctions between the koch brothers and us. their policies line up perfectly with their pocketbooks. we are trying to stand up for ideas and principles but we think are incredibly important but have nothing to do with their incomes are assets. that is a very distinct difference. second of all, we try to do this in a transparent as way as possible. we are trying to be completely pen. there's no question about something going on here that is secret. i do not think that is true. i do not think they have

been huge in fraser's of transparency. the koch brothers are business people who continue to prosecute business at the highest levels. they are funding efforts in. they are not getting up at 6:00 in the morning to go to work. they're getting at 6:00 in the morning to go to work at the refining business. that is different. i quit my job in the private sector, which was by all standards a terrific job, in order to do this full-time because i felt so strongly about it. the fact that we are on opposite sides of the table on a lot of issues, that is true. the way we are approaching them is very different. >> let me ask you questions about your own political futures. would you ever consider running or governor of california?

>> there is a gubernatorial race in california in 2014. i would do anything really that was sensible and legal to push the united states the right way. i would not run for governor california must there was something and meaningful that i thought would happen as a result of that. i would look at myself the same way i would look at these other candidates. it something good going to happen? i am interested in effect doing the omission that we could for ourselves. from a resume standpoint, what i'm doing is not particularly fantastic. >> do you consider yourself partisan? would you ever consider a republican candidate? >> that is a great question. i do consider myself a democrat. i am a registered democrat.

i think it is pretty hard to think of me as nonpartisan. i am very hopeful that the republican party will go back to the traditional republican party whose principles included a commitment to the environment. if you look at where the great environmental legislation has happened, it has been pretty consistent within republican administrations. the clean air acts, the endangered species act, the epa were all passed during the nixon administration. all four of those landmark pieces of legislation happened after the original earth day. if you ask me, in addition there were very important

legislations passed under president reagan and the first president bush. if you asked me if i could see supporting a republican on this issue, i could. unfortunately, i've never been confronted with that in the real world. i have to put it right now in the hypothetical range. right now we're not seeing a place where we see a republican strongly pushing him what i think is progressive and sensible energy and climate policies against the democrats who is dragging their feet and feels like the status quo is less important and we should be sticking with the technologies and policies of the past. hypothetically, it is interesting. in the real world we have to grapple with it. >> it seems unlikely that we'll see any significant legislation climate change come out congress. how quickly do you think we could see some action in congress? >> i agree with you.

if you add up the numbers, in your house and does not look like you can get to the levels that are necessary. there are great things going on in the states. the governors and the collections of states in the united states are doing some terrific things. that includes not just the governors who put together the greenhouse gas nitiative. at think it is functioning really well. but also the attempt at my home state of california or washington to form a west coast collaborative with the carbon market on the west coast. we are seeing governors and state legislatures really trying to adjust this problem in a systemic way and by collections of states. really stepping into a void that the commerce is leaving there because of inability to come to any kind of action. we are really hoping that is

a trend that will continue. basically these governors can lead the way to show what is possible and show the economic impacts are positive so they can put pressure on d.c. to actually move out of the paralysis they find themselves in. the fact of the matter is this is a global problem. this is not like localized pollution. this is a global problem. it demands a global solution. that means american leadership. when you think about what would make congress change, the only two things that would make congress change is either a change in the composition of congress or the change of the attitudes of the people in congress toward this issue. honestly, your guess is as good as mine. we can see very important changes. the congress of the united states is a proud and very

complicated institution. they are going to have to work through this as they have to work through a number of other national problems. as you think they are getting the recognition they deserve. what they have done and said in the last year, they have done a remarkably good job. people on the democratic side of the outer not realize what they have done. they have done a great job. where people tend to think that politics is just about congress, you have a federal system and be part of the government that are doing this right now. people are really stepping p.

>> people are meeting your expectations? >> if you go back starting with his speech at georgetown, what this administration has said, they are consistent about thinking of energy and climate as a legacy issue where they will do the right thing. they will stand up for what they think is important. if you go back and look and see what they have done, starting with the beginning obama administration, they have consistently done a pretty good job. i do not think they get the credit they deserve. i do not take this particularly seriously. it is time for democrats to understand this administration has really tried hard consistently to do the right thing. they realize what i have

been saying. this is a generational challenge. when people look at 50 years or 100 years from now, this is going to be the issue they judge people by. that aren't awful lot of issues in american politics in a hundred years that will be part of the great tariff debate but this is not one. >> is the obama administration's decision, is that going to define the president's legacy on this issue? >> that is an overstatement. there is a body of work here that has been done over a number of years. it is unfair to say that anyone

decision defines it. when you look forward, the obama administration has a fantastic opportunity and a traffic challenge in terms of the climate conference in paris at 2015. think they know it. it is important for the united states to take a leadership role thinking about paris 2015. in order to do that, i think they absolutely have to have the credibility and respect possible we are serious about this. this is not something where we are always going to do what is convenient, do what is best for us in the short term economically. i do not think keystone will be good for us economically. people make that argument. we're only going to do the easy

thing in the short term. you really want to lead you have to walk the walk. >> you are saying that if obama does approve keystone it is possible that he can still repair his environmental egacy? >> i thought i said something different. what i think i said was he going to have a body of work on energy in the environment that is not going to be totally dominated by keystone. i do not think keystone is important. i think the decision on keystone is going to be a gigantic measure of commitment to energy and the environment. i do not think there's any way around it. that is how the fights come out. there are lots of other energy issues that also matter or might matter more. that is true.

it has come down that this is the question of are you committed to making a different move and energy? people keep staying it is keystone or nothing. that is crazy. re we going to move to a different way of thinking about energy, a more progressive way that creates millions of jobs and leaves us with a lasting legacy are we going to do same old status quo? if we're going to do same status quo, we are not going to make the changes we need. we're going to be stuck in the same rut. when they look back at a hundred years we're going to say they really missed an opportunity. >> you are a businessman, it an investor. how would you measure whether or not you made wide investments? hat is your benchmark?

>> you have to realize how deeply superficial i am. i spent my life up to 22 playing a lot of sports. i do not think there is any way that you look at elections and do not look at in terms of wins and losses. if you look at american politics, the reason it is so competitive is people are very focused on w's and l's. we made a difference. things change. >> tom steyer is the founder and president of nextgen climate and action. thank you for being with us on "newsmakers." >> totally my pleasure. >> we will continue the conversation. let me begin with you. it is clear he is willing to make the investment in his passive about these issues. >> which race is he going to

play? $120 million is a lot of money to throw around. how much money as he going to spend and where? he is concerned with wins nd losses. >> it sounds that he is willing to spend even more, both he and his fellow investors. >> he definitely indicated there is no minimum or maximum. he's a billionaire. he is lots of money. he is always competing with this conservative side of the aisle when it comes to big-money spending. one of the other interesting things he said is there's going to be a lot of races were climate change just is not going to be the kind of clinch issue. he's going to have to pick and choose what races he actually gets into. >> you have had the chance to sit down and talk with him in a number of occasions. for our viewers watching and listening, what has motivated

him on these issues? >> i think from his perspective he thinks it is going to be an issue that defines how people look at the country and the policymakers of today and whether they've failed or acted to make a difference. i think that is where his passion goes from. quite that is right. this election will be a test of whether that translates into dollars well spent. this is unprecedented. we have not seen someone do this on this issue. we will see if 2014 motivates them to do this more order terse and. it determines how well he does. >> we have been seeing harry reid go after the code for others on the senate floor in recent weeks. now republicans are taking him. he was very clear to try and differentiate what motivates him and the cook

others. >> harry reid attended this. he certainly is trying to separate himself. certainly in terms of the law he is taking advantage of. there are similarities. >> what about his run for elective office? >> he would not be any shortage of money to finance a campaign. if somebody is open to the idea. he has a base of support there and fundraising stuff. he is somebody that is worth keeping an ion in terms of future openings for statewide office. >> is unabashed praise when it came to climate change, he did not seem like he was willing to openly criticize the president ust yet.

he is taking into account all of the things that obama does, not keystone. he mentioned keystone is very important. he is not throwing bombs at the president. >> thank you. we will look for your work. thank you both for being with us here. >> thank you. national captioning institute] cable satellite corp. 2014] tonight at 9:00 p.m. eastern on

c-span. >> more than a year there have been allegations that i knew about the planning of the watergate break-in and i was involved in an extensive plot to cover it up. the house judiciary committee is now investigating these charges. on march 6, i ordered all materials that i had previously furnished to the special prosecutor turned over to the committee. these included tape recordings of 19 presidential conversations and more than 700 documents from private white house files. on april 11, the judiciary committee issued a subpoena for 42 additional tapes of conversations, which it contended were necessary for its investigation. i agreed to respond to that subpoena by tomorrow. >>