of course we shouldn't. so we're here today to illuminate a problem that we think america should deal with for the good of the country not just the african-american community because there's a significant gap in terms of wealth generation, creation and maintenance that threaten the economic security of this country. let me just briefly highlight a few points along this spectrum. in terms of the unemployment rate, it is a significant difference. the white unemployment rate is 5.8% in this country. that is chart illustrates. e latino unemployment rate 7.9%. the african-american unemployment rate 12.4%. in in terms of annual median

income, you see the same type of disparity. the average median income for $57,009. icans, the average median income for 21. can-americans, $33,3 , d in terms of overall wealth 149. hite families, $113, but for african-american families in this great country, the average collective wealth .s $5,677 $100 in a or every white household, similarly situated african-american household only has $5. that's a problem for america

that we should all feel compelled to confront. that's why the congressional black caucus wants to invest in education and job training. invest in transportation and infrastructure. invest in research and development. invest in technology and innovation, invest in preserving the social safety net so that you can lift up communities left behind by the recession, but also collectively lift up america for the good of everyone. so now it's my honor and privilege to yield to the very distinguished gentleman from new york, prominent member of the ways and means committee, someone who has given so much of his life to public service and made such a difference for so many people in harlem, in new york city, in the country and in fact across the globe, the lion of lennox avenue, i'm proud to now yield to ongressman charlie rangel.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rangel: thank you so much for putting together this special hour. i got to new york a little late and in working, turning on the tv and saw these eloquent spokespeople and i am just so glad i got here in time before our time is expired. so all of those that made this ossible, it starts my new week down here with a breath of fresh air. last sunday i participated in eremonies at grant's tomb. and his great-great-grandson was there to speak on grant's not wanting slavery. we even had a few people dressed up in union uniforms which i had not seen before.

but at the conclusion of listening, just a few generations ago, this guy talking about general grant and president grant, it convinced me that some parts of the united states of america, they don't believe that the union won. the reason i come to that conclusion is that as i never , i that many union uniforms have never seen so many confederate flags that represent groups that are proud of the fact that they call themselves the tea party. and then i was thinking, because it was a long ceremony, where do these tea party people, what areas of the country are they most

comfortable? and i reached the conclusion, they're from that part of the country that the states owned slaves. and then i thought, well, are they democrats or republicans? they used to be not only democrats, but they fought against every civil right bill we had here. i never thought in the march with dr. king, from selma to montgomery, that we ever would get the civil rights and the voting rights. ut when we got it, somehow the dixicrats disappeared and all of a sudden they came up in the south as republicans. republicans that really hate this president as much as their predecessors probably hated abe lincoln. and it was all about slavery.

all about slavery. and you go to the parts of south america, the caribbean islands, mexico, all you see are remnants of slavery. even puerto rico. but here in this country, where we thought we had broken out of the civil war, what the heck does it take for people to nderstand that you shouldn't hate the president so much that you're ready to destroy the republican party, the entire congress, but most of all the people of this great country. we have been able to take people of all colors, all blood, all languages and they didn't come here and just fall in love with each other. they hardly knew each other. but somehow they set aside became ferences and

the power of the world and that power just wasn't in dollars and cents and the ability to have more than any other country in wealth, but it was hope. it was the ability to believe. that no matter what level of you conomy you are in, could achieve. this could not be said for many of the countries in europe. that's why they love their countries, but they cared for their families here. and now we have millions of people whose complexes look more like the people -- complexions look more like the who were here when columbus discovered them. then you find a hatred which defies economics and sound politics against people who want to come to this country, who have been invited -- who

invited construct uffle as we said -- constructively as we said, because they came, they got paid, everyone was happy, but the more that came, the more that want to come, their complexions started changing, the complexion of the nation. and why they refuse to allow the president to try to remove this cancer from america, why they don't understand that we just can't afford to destroy everything this country stands for. we are talking about immigration laws so that we can bring more talent. but most of all most of my colleagues were talking about education. how the heck can we allow party differences with the president to agree that we've got two million human beings locked up

in jail? most of them have -- the only people they ever hurt was themselves. the cost of keeping them incarcerated costs courts, food, health care, is mind blowing. ompared to the fraction of america's education that's paid to by this congress. some of of the setbacks has to do with the stigma of having come from slaves than by the slave owners. but the thing is, if a nation like ours is going to maintain any degree of similarities, we have to all pull together and not be divided by color, sex or where a person has been born or the language that they speak. so, i came over wondering, what

can 43 people of african background, combined with scores of people that have latsen american backgrounds -- latin american backgrounds, combined with so many other people that families can remember poverty and the pain of not being a part of the middle class, and to see this shrinking and missing a paycheck, a check for an unemployment compensation, a month in rent, homelessness, being in shelters, not being able to get a job, losing your kids, man, that's pain. that's not america. and so what can i do? well, i'm 84 and i guess i don't want to say anything that would jeopardize me getting to , but without any hassles

-- so i'll make an appeal to the priests, the ministers and e rabbis and the imams and say, you know, this is -- you deal with a higher authority, you deal with all people. god can't possibly have expected, when he had us to believe he made us in his image, that he could be so many different colors. he's one in our mind as he used these colors to make the world. i want to hear their voices when we talk about education and hunger and nakedness and thirst and being locked up and having some comfort. because that's what we're talking about today. so let me just thank you. we can't give up. we can't give in. we can't give out. we may not have an answer in this chamber. but the will of america can

change this chamber and we just have to have good people. whether they're in synagogues, mosques orca theedrals. to call their -- or cathedrals. to call their congressperson and say, this is not the time for our great nation to be divided by class, color or wealth. what ime for us to do that sign says. and god we trust. and we have to trust and we have to fight and we have to win. thank you for the opportunity for all of us to express ourselves. mr. jeffries: i thank the distinguished gentleman from new york for his incredibly eloquent and thoughtful, insightful presentation and analysis. we've now been joined by a senior member of the judiciary committee and homeland security committee, a voice for the voiceless, someone who has fought to promote justice and equality across a wide spectrum

of issues, but certainly in the economic arena. such a compelling way during her career in the house and throughout her entire career in public service. let me now yield to the distinguished gentlelady from texas, congresswoman sheila jackson lee. ms. jackson lee: let me thank the gentleman from new york for convening this dialogue with our colleagues and through our colleagues, the american people , and mr. horsford as well as the congressional black caucus, and the passionate words of our colleague, the gentleman from new york, mr. rangel and others, who have come on this floor to challenge our colleagues. i think the backdrop of this whole discussion is the ryan budget of which we debated before we left for the work recess. and i think it is important that we not allow that budget

to just pass with a vote and let it not represent the moral document that now the republicans have tied themselves to. interestingly enough, while we were away, it seems that america caught on fire. for some reason the season generated a number of unfortunate and sad incidences that really reinforced this wealth gap that is so very important. and i have 10 points that i'd like to succinctly mention in the backdrop of the ryan budget which cuts drastically the social network of america, which really makes america great. some of us had the opportunity , be in countries outside untries, as we were during the recess, south and central america, europe and other places, and you come back to this country and you thank god

for its greatness and i still do that. but i also know that it can be great or it was great because people pulled together and recognized that there's no shame in a social safety network. for it was people of all backgrounds, caucasians, hispanics, african-americans and others that were in this country that celebrated the creation of the social security or medicare and medicaid back in the 1960's, social security under franklin delano roosevelt. . and so it is tragic that we have to look at numbers that show the wealth inequality. it is more tragic that we compound this discrimination with ugly words that really suggests that there is a lack of understanding for why these numbers exists.

i might say to mr. bunny, who suggested that government subsidies is all that african -americans receive and we would be better off with picking cotton and maybe a fair distribution of wealth at the end of slavery, there would have been the investment in that now free-population and look at them and say, why didn't you succeed. a know, we lived under discriminatory society much of the 20th century. and there wasn't an equalized right until the 1960's. a decision that was rendered in affirmative action, it undermines america. it takes away from african-american students and asian students to go to school

together. compounded, of course by the atmosphere and the attitudes of the owner of the clippers that in today 2014 that suggests i don't want to be taking a picture with, don't promote it, whatever his situation might have been with an ex-girlfriend, it speaks to the diss krim nation in a goes to wealth. we have to change our attitude about all of us. and frankly, unemployment rates emphasizes the discrimination in employment. african-americans, 12.4% and higher. hispanics, 7.9%. i don't want unemployment in any group. i fight for full employment for everyone, because that is what is america is about.

creating the working middle class. and i hope our discussion focuses on the fact that we want that to occur. we can clearly see that the decline in wealth has gone from 53% in the african-american community. and bankruptcy filings. likewise, you can show the highest amount is in african-americans. let me conclude, the budget that mr. ryan has will never answer question of solving the problem of lifting all americas cans. i thank for you yielding to me. we have to find a solution that ends the evilness of racism and rifts the boats of all americans because they they demb that goes to poor whites, african-americans and asians. a solution must be found.

i yield back. mr. jeffries: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's aannounced policy january 3, 201, the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from minnesota, mrs. baum, for half of the time remaining until 10:00. mrs. bachmann: i thank the chair for that and i'm grateful to be here tonight. today is a significant day. it is a holocaust remembrance day. and the greatest ally that the united states has, israel, had a remarkable experience as they hold every day because of the unique situation that the jewish people have endured. and that is, the entire nation and all the people in israel came to a pleeth stop. cars literally stopped. buses literally stopped in the mid of hey ways.

metro stopped. wherever they are. maybe kids playing in a park, they stopped. a siren goes off for two minutes time. and during that time, every person in the nation comes to a standstill. why? s this extraordinary action? not simply like the history of the israel has happened anywhere like the anals. six million lost their lives. they lost thare lives because they were jewish. children, grandparents, moms and dads. they were disfigured, they were disabled, they were high necessarily nd not in israel. they were in countries all

across european areas. six million died. and it's important that we never forget. that we never forget. that a people were so brutally targeted, that six million were killed virtually in silence. silence because of the devious ays in which the german regime carried out this horrific action. that's what happened 70 years ago. a war we will commemorate, dmb d-day this june , as we should should. one of the greatest sacrifices we ever made from one people to another, led in large part by the americans to liberate europe as they were under this cloud of hitler. it's a horrific past, but

something we have to remember, because we can never forget. we can never ever, ever forget. and we join with our great ally israel as we remember this will act, a raceist act on the part of hitler. and that's why today we are rather shocked when the story was disclosed that our american steck secretary of state had made comments last friday behind closed doors in a meeting with a trilateral commission and he had said if israel does not go along with the proposed two-state solution that israel would risk becoming an apartheid state. now that is a shocking comment to come from an american

secretary of state, particularly to have this comment revealed on the holocaust remembrance day to accuse the jewish people, who have undergone what no other people have gone, a who are i done by hitler and yet our secretary of state, accusing this nation of engaging n an act, an institutional act against another people based upon race. with no evidence whatsoever, because there is none. i want to read the definition of

the 1998 rome statute that says, the crime of apartheid is defined as inhuman acts committed in the context of an nstitutionalized regime of one rirbleegraup over another group and committed with 9 intention of maintaining that regime. hat would apply to a hitler. that did apply in the case of south africa. t does not in any possible imagination or universe apply in any possible sense to the jewish state of israel. and yet that is what our secretary of state said last friday in reference to our greatest ally. our secretary of state needs to apologize humbly to the people of israel and then he needs to

tender his resignation immediately to the president of the united states. but our secretary of state didn't stop there. he went on to reiterate a statement that he had made prior hat will merely was an echo of what the palestinians intim mated was this, that israel could be looking at a third war, that israel could look at a war y the palestinians by pell who would engage in the terrorist acts by israel. that israel could be looking at a threat of another war if they failed to give up 40% of their land to people who, number one, don't recognize that israel has a right to exist, and number two, they have a right to exist

as a jewish state. and number three, they have the right top defend themselves. since when do we force our greatest ally to sit down with people and negotiate with people who want to see them killed and i nile ated. that is the stated position of ham ause. read article 7 of the ham ause charter. the head of the palestinian authority recently said i'm 79 years old, he said, and i have no intention of changing my ways. in other words, he has no intention of recognizing the state of israel and their right to exist. and the united states is expecting after that statement, sit ly that israel would

down and negotiate with people who have said they will never recognize the right to exist and israel is the bad guy here? mr. secretary, mr. speaker, israel is the bad eye here? i think we have our priorities wrong here. abbas said he will not recognize israel's right to exist, but the palestinian authority and ham ause, which is a foreign errorist orings, has said that they are looking to merge the palestinian authority and ham ause and again, we are -- ham as, we are going to israel to sit down at a negotiated table and negotiate with terrorists and give the terrorists 40% of their land?

this is madness. this is once again an alternative universe that doesn't make any sense. our secretary of state went on to say that israel has built 14,000 living units, apartments, extra rooms, what have you for jewish people. of course, a population that increases has to build apartments. how many times has our secretary of state talked about the palestinians building of apartments on their land, because after all, this is israelis building apartments on their own land. since when is this a detriment to peace? and sibs when will our secretary of state ever call out the palestinians and say, those palestinians, they shouldn't be building apartments. they shouldn't be bimenting

houses on their land. you kidding? on the multiple times i have been to israel, it is a building bonanza going on in the palestinian authority. and if that's their land. more power to them. let them go and ahead to build. since when is it wrong? there is a reason why the obama administration has been accused of ks the most anti--israel american administration since harry truman recognized the american jewish state of israel in may of 1948. 11 minutes after israel declared their independence, the greatest economic superpowerhouse of the

world recognized israel's right to exist. that meant something. because our strength and our wealth was behind israel. we had israel's back. thinks that tion america has israel's back today. all you have to do is look at israel's neighborhood. it has become a very dangerous place, a very dangerous place indeed. the epicenter of jihad on israel's border on syria's border. more weapons floating around today in the hands of terrorists than ever before. ,. and our secretary you of state, instead of being focused on iran obtaining a nuclear weapon, which has said it will

use to murder millions of jewish people in israel, rather than the secretary of state calling out iran for its ongoing action, tonight as i'm speaking on -- before c-span and before the speaker of this house, tonight iran has thousands and thousands and thousands of centrifuges spinning fizzle material that can be used and converted into nuclear weapons. tonight as we speak research and development continues to go on for nuclear war heads. tonight as i speak, iran continues to work on a deliver system, a missile delivery system to deliver a nuclear bomb, a nuclear warhead, with the fissile material, to take out israel. and the fact is, iran already has the capability to deliver a missile into israel. what they don't have is that

capability yet to deliver a nuclear warhead against us, the united states. you see, that's iran's ultimate goal. they call us, the u.s., the great satan. israel is the little satan. and so of course the goal of iran would be, let's wipe out with a nuclear weapon some strategic main cities in america so that we can achieve our real goal which is the annihilation of the jewish state of israel. that's the goal. where's our secretary of state calling out iran? what about the epicenter of jihad, syria, where weapons are awash? where's our secretary of state there? talking about the numerous, numerous terrorist organizations that are already running completely independent in syria? where's our secretary of state talking about the problem with

the communist nation of russia which has illegally seized crimea and is now making incursions into the eastern area of ukraine? i just returned from a trip, mr. speaker, on sunday, visiting some former soviet block nations, to talk about their response to the aggressive, illegal actions of russia and what's happening, to reset the table in the former soviet block nations. these are nations that are very worried about what they're seeing. they're worried because they understand that you can trust a communist to be a communist and their actions today are a mere image of what their action were formerly. russia recognizes if no one pushes back, they will continue to salivate over more lands and more influence and seek to

dominate more people. russia's responsible for enslaving millions of people. in fact, they even murdered tens of millions of their own people under stalin. this is the regime that needs to be washed. and unfortunately under our previous secretary of state, hillary clinton, she gave, in my opinion unwisely, the reset button to the former soviet -- to the former russian government and apparently didn't think that they'd push the button. they did. they pushed the reset button. and they pushed it in a way that has the soviet union looking at the united states and making the calculation that the united states is now a weak power, that we have weakened rselves and therefore now is russia's opportune time to seek to influence and pull back into the fold former soviet block

nations. as we've learned from history, .hen a mad man speaks, listen mad men spoke in the form of lenin and stalin and tens of millions of people were enslaved in misery for decades. the same happened under adolf hitler, with a mad man who spoke and he murdered six million jewish people. that's why we have today the holocaust remembrance day. we need to pay attention today to the thugs and rulers that are making their mad statements. they're doing it again. and that's why again, why did the obama administration demand that israel release from prison over 100 murdering terrorists -- murdering terrorists, murderers, who murdered innocent people, children, women, men, in order for the palestinian authority just to go to the table and have

negotiations and talks and now these same leaders are saying, don't worry, we'll never recognize the jewish state. and oh, by the way, we want to form up a new league with a terrorist organization. that's why i say tonight, mr. speaker, our secretary of state has to first apologize to the jewish state and then tender his resignation. and i call on president obama, mr. speaker, to completely change course on his foreign policy. we are looking at one foreign policy disaster after another. after the thugs of the world have calculated that the united states has put itself into a position of weakness while we are in the process of gutting our -- the greatest military force in the world, the bad actors of the world are recalculating and resetting the table and we're seeing china making aggressive moves that we

haven't seen before against japan. and causing trouble in that area and region of the world. we're seeing russia making incursions again, as i just said, into eastern europe that we haven't seen before. even just today we heard of a mayer in eastern ukraine who was shot in the back by russian forces, just over this last weekend there were those who were killed also in ukraine and those who were taken hostage. this is moving forward. this isn't stopping. this is moving forward. and in syria, with the epicenter of jihad. and as we saw, three americans killed, innocent americans killed in afghanistan by a member of the taliban. you see, they're making calculations, these murderers. they're looking at the united states, they're seeing this failed foreign policy, they're seeing that america won't stand up for her allies like the jewish state of israel and that

every turn we lift up the agenda. for some inexplicable reason of the radicals i lamist who seeks to destroy the -- islamist who seeks to destroy the jewish state and destroy the united states of america. it is a policy that will lead to a day that i believe we will all regret and that's why america and the world needs to wake up and listen to these bad actors. so when our secretary of state calls the jewish state of israel an apartheid state, it is more than unhelpful, those words are dangerous. because a state that was born after seeing six million of its exateyots, 1/3 of the entire -- compatery ots, 1/3 of the

entire jewish population at that time, 1/3 of its people anye lighted -- annihilated by a ruler named hitler, to see hem called an apartheid state, institutional oppression, really? there is no such thing. ou will find it nowhere. the speaker pro tempore: will the gentlelady suspend? mrs. bachmann: i will. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013,, the gentlewoman from minnesota, is recognized for the remainder of the half hour. mrs. bachmann: i thank you, mr. speaker, and i appreciate that. as we look again to the jewish state and as we remember with great sadness what this day signifies, the incredible loss of life that this signifies, i am reminded, mr. speaker, of the violence that i witnessed

myself on a recent trip that i took to israel. i was in the area that president obama and secretary of state kerry have demanded that the jewish state give up and yield. which is 40% of its land. it's the biblical homeland of the jewish people. hebron is the city essentially where the jewish people were born. abraham was in heeb ron. and it was -- hebron. and it was in hebron where i was invited into the home of a jewish woman who is in a so-called settlement and has been there for decades. she invited me into her kitchen and in her kitchen she showed me some of the doors on her cabinets. those doors on her cabinets had bullet holes in them. bullet holes. bullet holes fired across her

land, over her deck, in through the glass windows of her kitchen and into the cabinet doors of her kitchen. every day her family is reminded of the very real existence that they have, that they literally can be in their home and bullets can fly in, to a place where children should be able to be free. where a wife should be able to whip up supper or breakfast and not have to dodge bullets. you see, that's the very real existence that the jewish citizens have had to face in the southwestern section of israel. where i had a chance to live for a summer, the day after i graduated from high school, i was privileged to be able to go .nd live on it and work there

it's the area now that is oftentimes dealing with the violence from gaza. where various rockets are fired from gaza. into the jewish area. with no other intention other than killing innocent civilians . this is what israel deals with on nearly a daily basis. mr. speaker, just in the month of february alone this year, in 2014, there were more rockets that were shot into israel in this one month, this year, in february, than there were all of the previous 12 months in 2013 put together. the jewish state sunday attack. and yet what's israel's response? in israel, especially in the area known as the disputed territory, what's called

occupied territory by people in our united states' state department, the greatest human rights that women, arab, muslim women in the middle east are country is in no other than israel, in the so-called occupied territory. at's the area where women, arab-muslim women, enjoy the greatest protection of human rights. and israel is being called the apartheid state? women, muslim women enjoying the greatest rights that they could find anywhere in the middle east in israel? what about jobs? jobs are available for palestinians in israel. at higher wages, at better conditions. and they are grateful to have those jobs. i was in the area where there's a threat by now potentially

european nations and other nations, even 5,000 academics from america were calling for boycotts, divestment and sanctions on any products that are made in the so-called occupied territories. those are israel's biblical homeland. there are 3,500 years of history, just pick up the bible , read the bible. this is the land that god gave to abraham. he said, i give you this land, abraham, to you and your descendents through isaac, through the descendents of abraham, i give you this land. not just for a year or for five years or 10 years, but in the bible god said, i give you this land for eternity. if you do not want to believe the bible or if you think that

that's a book of fiction, that's up to you. i believe it's true. you can look at historic documents, you can look at documents from this last century that international agreement gave this particular piece of land not to any other country but to israel. this is israel's rightful land. this has been a long effort on the part of the arab-muslim people who made a decision that they don't want israel to exist. as i said previously, bl speaker, even thehood of the palestinian authority, abbas has said, i'm 79 years old and i'm not about to recognize israel now. he is the one that israel is supposed to negotiate with? even the leader of the

palestinian authority, and going back for decades, the stated position has been from the palestinians, israel does not have the right to exist. we will push the jews into the sea and take it over. it isn't they don't want israel, they don't want any jews in israel. they don't want jews anywhere on the planet. no where do they believe the jews have a right to exist. and after six million jews murdered by hitler. there is an ongoing genocide, if you will, because there are a group of people who still believe today that the jews have no right to examine exist. this isn't a modern phone no, ma'amon. go back to the days of haman when he didn't want the jewish people to exist and he purchase

swayeded the king at that time to eliminate and exterminate all the jewish people. and won woman was called upon by her uncle and he said to her and her name was esther, could it be that you have been called to a position for such a time as this. and her uncle called upon queen esther and said to the queen, you need to go to the king and you need to ask the king to pardon the jewish people from this death sentence and esther said to her uncle, but if i go into the king, i could be killed. i'm not allowed to go into the king, i have to wait until he calls upon me. and that's when he said to his neice, to queen esther, could it be that you were apointed to

such time as this? and she rose up at that moment and she had courage and went before the king and the king, rather than banishing her or rather than her seeing the end of her life, called her in and asked what she wanted. she made the request and intercreeded on behalf of the jewish people and the jewish people were spared. you see, mr. speaker, this isn't a one-off. from the time of the creation of the jewish people, through abraham, this is a godsend, he created this people and this genesis,in the book of those who bless israel. those who cuffers israel, i will

curse. it is for all time. and united states of america, i believe, my opinion, has been blessed by standing by the jewish people and on the day of rememberians on the holocaust, we stand with israel, we, too, remember and stand up against those who want to see the extermination of the jewish race. mr. speaker, is my time out? i yield back to the speaker. and i thank you. . the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlewoman from minnesota have a motion? mrs. bachmann: i make a motion that we do now adjourn. the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. , no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted.

accordingly the

returns, was paying his employees under the table with cash. undocumented immigrants. a second setining of payroll records in order to hide the actual payroll situation he had set up. he also is being accused of lying under of 2010.anuary there was a lawsuit brought against him by two former employees saying they weren't paid overtime or minimum wage. michael grimm allegedly said he didn't use a personal e-mail account, which the grand jury didn't did. they said he

talk about or denied he paid employees in cash, which prosecutors say they have evidence to suggest contrary. his response in your latest article? >> he hasn't responded directly. he held a press conference after his arraignment outside a courthouse in new york. he was innocent, that his legal team would handle the charges and they would fight to exonerateil" them. in the meantime he would continue to stay in office and would stay in office next fall. is calling it.he he is a former marine. >> he became an undercover agent, sussing out wall street.

the legal procedure should be familiar to him. he did call it a witchhunt. he to theseeking directly charges, saying he is innocent. he has called himself a man of honor and integrity. >> as a sitting member of congress, what rules of the house applied that could affect him. >> there is nothing that could force him to step down. response will's play a big role in determining what comes next and whether there is pressure to step down. boehner should say something tomorrow at his weekly press conference if not tomorrow, but in the meantime we have a president for members of congress being indicted and dealing with political scandals and still serving. was indicted and

went to trial and was found guilty at the time in 2010i believe. and went on to be defeated by his challenger. he was sentenced to prison earlier this year. >> as far as senator graham is concerned, what about the house ethics committee? how can they be involved? >> the house ethics committee has no jurisdiction to get involved. there is an investigation involving campaign finance fraud and allegations of misconduct leading up to his election in 2010. the ethics committee has held in reference to the department of justice

investigation and especially with jurisdiction over what they are supposed to investigate -- .otential misconduct that members were responsible were elected as members of congress. this happened before he was elected. they would say it's not within his jurisdiction. i said that ted stevens was defeated in 2010. it was actually 2008. >> you can find her on twitter. and also her work at roll call.com. afternoon,s representatives rim sent a letter to john boehner, saying in light of recent events, i am writing this letter to respectfully request the position on the -- the and

removed from the position. resume -- n is to in a few minutes a preview of the agenda. and then we hear from the ambassador to the u.s. and discussion of middle east peace topics -- peace talks. step, a positive step. the people watching us and anding about congress seeing we were able to act not perfectly but in a bipartisan

fashion to try to take a step toward fiscal this possibility, yes,l stability, and caring for those who most need our help in this country. so i urge my colleagues to support this legislation. not as a democrat, not as a republican, but as an american who understands our people believe action is necessary. i would urge all of us as we close this debate to do so in a way that rings us together, not drives us apart. that reaches out to the best in us and not the partisan in us. it is time for this congress to come together and address this

issue and act together and pass -- this bill. i yield back my time. >> find more highlights on our facebook page. c-span, created by america's cable companies and brought to you today by your local cable or satellite provider. >> the house and senate were back in session monday. as members return from a two-week break. over the next hour we will focus on the legislative agenda for the next several months. this part of washington journal is an hour. ontinues. host: in this segment, we will discuss the week ahead for congress. joining me is jeff mason. he's a congressional correspondent. can you give us the highlights of the big things you're

watching from president obama's it is been anest: interesting trip for him. the president has made a point of saying in press conferences that it was not about containing china. he went to four different countries. he went to japan, malaysia, was recently the philippines, and he also made a stop in south korea. a lot of people have been watching it as a china containment tour. the last thing that happened in the philippines this last up, announced --tates is been interesting watching him deal with that. obviously, china and u.s. have an important relationship. the allies in that region are worried about the rise of china as well. lawmakers are returning

after a two-week vacation. i wouldn't look for whole bunch happening, at least this week or over the next two months. thomas is beginning to debate spending bills for the coming year. that is the actual legislating that is going on. artief the legislating is gearing towards the november elections. maisie big one for primaries, both in the house and senate. mitch mcconnell faces is primary in may. there's a couple of feet once and senate primaries. of the biggest races is in idaho this month, as well. how big of a role as a 2014 elections? is completely overshadowing everything that is happening on capitol hill. the other things that are happening are messaging votes.

democrats are going to be talking about trying to hike the minimum wage. they have almost no chance of coming into law this year. that is what they're going to be talking about. a contempt vote for lois lerner. they want to hold her in contempt of the house. they won't say look, we are listening to, we are outraged, two. he's going to be quite a figure in these 2014 races. have we seen the white house telegraph anything in that manner? absolutely. it is affecting virtually everything that is going on. you hear more and more talks in the white house about raising the minimum wage. there's a loting of effort and time into the fact gettingre is no chance

pass on capitol hill. he is pressed really hard for democrats to campaign on the success, so far, of the affordable care act. we will possibly see a bit on immigration, as well. democrats running in primaries against the democrats, they are to talk about their love of the affordable care act. what are we hearing from the white house about? guest: i think the white house is very proud that they got up to over 8 million people enrolled. it exceeded expectations from outside pundits, from lots of

analysts, and they're very happy to trumpet that. there will be another enrollment. coming up later this fall. right now to have to worry about getting their next health and human services secretary confirmed in the senate. that is something they will be working on now. you try to encourage democrats and citizens in states on the country to see the benefits of , and not to focus on the crummy rollout that was last year. if you'd like to join the conversation for republicans, the number is jeff, i will have you respond with what we are likely to see

in the white house. >> i think there is going to be a lot of discussing immigration but not voting on immigration. the bill passed the senate and they said we will not be taking this up. instead, you will have democrats pushing them to try to take it up. the speaker has said two different groups outside of washington, to the donor community, he wants to do something on immigration, but the reality is he will not be doing something on immigration, at least not a comprehensive bill. his own membership does not want. a lot of it is trying to build a coalition at some point in the future to get a republican majority to take up the vote in the house. it does not look like that is going to be happening in 2014. host: we played john boehner's comments. tell us about whether or not you have heard it a brush back on that. of the things one of the father you get from washington the more comfortable sums bakersfield speaking their mind. you feel better about being more honest.

basically, mywere membership, they don't want to do anything big. is interesting juxtaposition that he can be very different. he happened to be the very hard right of his conference. he does month of bills coming to the floor this year, either. have the pace to possibly take the senate majority. when is his big things, he is talking about bipartisan big things. are we hearing from the white house on immigration? people expect the president to do something in the realm of order about deportation. this administration has a record , despite the clear interest that she has.

he campaigned on it in 2012. pushed aistration has lot of undocumented immigrants out of this country. the white house has ordered a review, jeh johnson is working on that right now. we can expect some results on in the coming weeks and months. what exactly that is is unclear. the president has said despite using executive action and lots of other areas this year, he hasn't really indicated he is willing to do something really big on that very i think we can expect to see something in addition to that. you will see some pushing from the white house, hoping that maybe they can get some love from john boehner and others in the house, or some kind of legislative package, which is really important to the president's legacy. the president has shown just enough skin.

the white house has really not been after him. 2: what do not do so that you can actually achieve something on this issue this year without closing doors, but also showing that you're doing something that is serious? host: our next call comes from salt point, new york this morning. she is a democrat. i was calling in regards to this house vote on the unemployment extension. and a standard immigration is important, but i think that a lot of people in new york and other states in the united states really need this extension. unfortunately, we have not been able to go on vacation like you folks. son is this open to happened we people can go back to our

lives? your blaster homes, families about to move other places, because we cannot afford to keep them. one of the big issues looming over this congress is the fact that long-term unemployment insurance expired in january, and the senate has taken up the issue. the house is not shown about issue in -- interest in doing this. as is a legislative purgatory where things tend to end up when they are not moving and going anywhere. 2: again, as shane says, you have to willing partners in congress to make that happen. we have another caller on the line for republicans. caller: i think boehner is missing the point about illegal immigration. whining aboutt how the white house and democrats are doing a bad job, he missed a huge opportunity

when the mexican government actually published an official document on how to cross the border illegally. republicans should have house on pounced onuld have that. it is just a matter of money. so much money these illegal immigrants cost us. do is open up the dialogue with the mexican government and get them to pay for their own people, and also other governments. i don't see why nothing has been done to support that view. i'm not familiar with the document you're talking about. the lawsle feel like are not strict enough to prevent people from coming across the border.

he can't get the on that. if that is a problem and you can't fix that, then discussion over. 2: i think for security is a big part of the package. certainly, the white house is .alking about it is important for them, for the president to try and get bipartisan support for that package. a big chunk of that in terms of appealing to republicans and probably to the callers well is boosting border security. i want to talk about the keystone pipeline. the state department talked about a delay of that issue. our politics behind what is g?ppening yucca guest: 2: the truth is, most

people think politics are playing a big role here. putting off this decision does give democrats, at least particularly the president praised some time and motivation on an issue that they feel very strongly about. does shirts and democrats, which shane can talk about as well. overall, is an issue that is very important to environmentalists, too young people who are very critical in getting obama elected. you have seen demonstrations in washington and elsewhere across united states. streets. people in the it doesn't matteris, carrying st keystone. many people think this decision served as a way of getting up to

base before the 2014 elections, which as the president often mentions, midterm elections are not always great for democrats because democrats do not always come out and vote. this may help them do that but it may hurt the democrats as well. the challenge for democrats is they want to get their vote. if he rejected it, you will have a lot of democratic activist feel excited. but if you reject it, you put a lot of energy state producing democrats and others from the south, mary landrieu, particularly prominent in the energy arena, mark pryor, mark begich, who has no really immediate impact on the pipeline, but he is sending the message to swing voters. thise do not think election is about swing voters. he is playing it off because [no audio]

wasronmentalists thought it positive although they would have preferred to have a rejection, no question. industry saw it as negative but they also saw hope in the fact that the administration did not just use the opportunities to eject the pipeline. they have had plenty of opportunities to eject it. the fact that they are letting it stay open like this is a good sign. claudia is in greensburg, north carolina. on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i was calling to check, i know the houses coming back into session today. are they going to discuss the extended unemployment? 60-someeen working for years, and i think they should take that into consideration who are people representing that. we need help until we are able to find jobs. it is pending in the

house but they are not looking to take it up. eric cantor sent out a memo to all the members at the end of last week. the unemployment extension was not a part of the memo. this was not on the front burner. frankly, the reason it continues to come up in washington is folks like you and the previous callers continue to talk about it. it is a concern across the country and they are feeling pressure. who are long-term unemployed are not the politically powerful, the wealthy, the ones not getting their voice heard in washington. this issue will continue to languish because there is no political movement to push this forward to the point it is. sarah is on the line from burtonsville, there -- maryland. caller: i am a somali-american and a proud republican.

i just want to say, democrats compromise, basically. just to get votes, they will do anything just to increase their voters. whether it means to weaken the country, just to weaken the , orervative base outsourcing jobs, i just do not think they are on a path of sustainability. our deficit is through the roof. exceeds our gdp and that is the problem. i do not think they are concerned about that. not not know if they do care about it but they care about reelection more. side: regardless of which you are on, it is important to say that both parties are interested in reelection. you mentioned the word compromise. that is something that is something we do not see as much

in congress and with the white house in the last few years. it will be very interesting to see what happens at the end of this year and in the midterm elections as to whether the balance of power changes on capitol hill and whether that leads to more compromise between democrats and republicans or potentially a democratic white house and a completely agree -- control republican congress. there are two groups at odds [no audio] the white house had one agenda, the house had one agenda. you talk about minimum wage, the senate will be taking that out. you can guarantee when the president gets to town, he will say something about minimum wage. they want to talk about pay equity. the white house scheduled a big event.

the next day, senate democrats are taking a vote on the exact same issue. you are not looking at a lot of compromise. you are looking at people making sure they have a unified line for those fights. host: what are we likely to hear about minimum wage? guest: the house has been clear they want to raise minimum wage. the president has been highlighting states that have done that independently. many of his travels in the used hishe has speeches and rallies to focus on the issue of raising the minimum wage. he says give america a wage does -- america a raise. it is something he will continue to push. as we were saying earlier, the winner for needs a the base politically, and it is something that they will keep pushing, going into the midterm elections. right, we willis probably hear from the president about that this week. -- shane is right, we will

probably hear from the president about that this week. next phone call from california. calvin is on the line for democrats. i just want to know where the concern is for congress making 137 days a year, $170,000, and where is all the coverage? and yet, ior me, cannot tell them to come back to work. 130 days a year? for aboutke to go on 15 minutes, i know you do not have the time, but that is just for starters, thanks. as the caller mentioned, they spend a lot of time outside of washington. they call it dish it worked periods. quitetrue, they are gone

a bit. right now, they are really in the one solid work going to of the year, eight or nine weeks where either the house or senate or both are in session in washington. it is absolutely true they spent a lot of time not in washington. guest: i am sure a lot of them would argue that they need to spend time in washington -- not in washington, in their home district. it is an avenue of criticism that we hear. the president gets criticized when he goes on vacation as well. i'm not sure it is fair to say that all those 137 days are not necessarily vacation. thing, whenther they are back in their districts, they can do a lot of constituent work. there is not much happening in washington. when they are back home, at least they can help something. host: a related story in "the washington post." they found 60% of americans say they are inclined to look around

for somebody else in the midterm elections, including the majority of democrats, republicans, and independents. is congress more or less unpopular? guest: it is always unpopular, but when you look at whether people get reelected, almost overwhelmingly, nine out of 10 people get reelected. yes people are frustrated and they want to shop around, but at the end of day, they go back to the same store and buy the same clothes that they have been buying forever. in texas, the oldest member of congress ever, 93 years old, facing a a party challenger. he is 90, still kicking out on the trail, but perhaps it is time for another page. he may be retired later this month against his wishes, but he has been there for a very long time. it is gephardt -- it is hard -- it is hard

getting rid of members of congress. guest: we talked about the rollout of health care earlier. that has had a negative impact on the president ratings. even on his trip to asia right now, some of that political ph you needm politically and mystically is a challenge for him. i think they see a lot of possibilities this year, despite the fact that they are not getting a lot of support from or his ideas. i think they see an upswing because theust affordable care act is sort of rebounding, in a big and successful way for them. guest: one of those great washington moments a couple weeks ago, the president talking about the affordable care act, 8 million people signing up, and at the same time in another state, chelsea clinton is doing an event and tells people that she is pregnant. and then people are buzzing, what does this mean for 2016?

probably nothing, but it means that people are already looking ahead. that is a problem exercising power abroad. it is a challenge that he needs to look at ahead. guest: it is a challenge being named a lame duck, so early in the second term, but the truth is he has not been able to get much done in congress. if power shifts to republicans in the senate, he does not have that one chamber to wooster his priorities, so it will be very interesting, as we said before, to see how the white house works y completelyiall control republican congress. i read earlier that he may start to worry too much and give away the store, the issues that they care about. hard to predict at this point, but definitely tricky for the white house, in that they still have two and a half years of governing and they are not able

to get much of his agenda done. guest: and the republicans know this. if you have watched the nba playoffs, the team that is ahead and takes the ball and tries to run down the clock. this is what congress is doing. will become a lame duck and the longer they can keep the ball away from him, whether it is immigration or unemployment insurance, they do not want to advance anything, they just want to dribble around in circles and run down the clock. guest: which is why the president is trying to use executive action to prioritize -- advance his priorities. we saw something on climate change, and we should see more in the next few months. the epa will be setting new standards for existing power plants, a missions of the carbon dioxide emissions, the main greenhouse gas, and that, as we think about his legacy, will be a big chunk, despite the fact that he cannot get much done in

congress. host: next phone call is al in pennsylvania. caller: a couple of points about immigration. 7.5 million illegal immigrants are holding jobs in our country. over half of them got the jobs by presentation to their employers of forged social security cards, and then by perjurious as a station on the immigration form that they were able to work in the u.s. the key to immigration reform is to pass copper handset, for ally e-verify employers, so that illegal aliens cannot get jobs in the united states. then they would not come over. final point. deportation numbers are grossly misstated in the media. over two thirds of the deportations are those people caught by the border patrol at the mexican border, processed

briefly by immigration, customs, and enforcement, setback. no previous administration were the sendak's call deportations. deportations from the interior is less than one percent of the total number of illegal aliens in the country, a record low. it is interesting the last point the caller made about deportations. a white house is proud about a story that came out about a week ago that showed over all the statistics are moving in the direction of fewer deportations since 2009 when the front -- president first came in. ify andgard to e-ver employers, that is a big question. making sure and lawyers are punished if they break the law in terms of hiring immigrants, -- undocumented immigrants, but i think you would also here about those millions of people who are undocumented immigrants

and hold jobs. they are doing jobs that other americans will not do or do not want to do. that is a critical question for employers and for the economy. what do you do if you cannot find people in, let's say, florida, early to pick fruit -- who need to pick fruit? that is a big question hovering over the immigration debate, one that will need to be addressed. and that is why the business community and congress have been pushing for immigration reform. they need a way to get those workers in the country. nashville, gary is on the line for republicans. caller: i understand you all were very happy that the white house made the 8 million mark on , but how does the white house feel about the 5 million that were kicked off a private insurance? if you like your health

insurance, you can keep it. how can they be happy about anything with the aca when it was all predicated on a lie? there are still more lies to come. let's start by saying that we were not happy but the white house was happy. the evidence is clear about that, in terms of the president's comments, comments by democrats as a result of that. the point that you raise, in terms of people who were kicked off, for sure, that is a critical issue, and a concern for the white house, in addition to republicans and democrats running for reelection. you have seen the white house take measures to make it easier for those people who lost their plans, to stay on them longer. even those measures have received criticism because of what republicans have portrayed as the ability of the white house to ride over the law and address these problems without actually making the fundamental changes that republicans need.

there is the core problem. guest: the president was talking about what the law would mean. he kept on saying, if you like your health care plan, you can keep it. that turns out not to be true, and it is clear from the get go, and it is also true that health care plans change from year to year and get moved around. that said, the white house purposefully kept a line that was for them, politically pernicious, and not as specific as they needed to be. guest: that was troublemaking for them once the evidence showed that he was not able to keep that promise. it is something that is still dogging him today, as the caller rightly pointed out. woodbridge, virginia. charles is on the line for republicans. for taking myyou call. i am like the previous color of how much time do you have? pipeline, i went

online, i was curious. it was amazing to me how many pipelines are already in the u.s.. that is political in asia get people to work. on the unemployment issue, what they need to do is, unemployment for the first 26 weeks is standard. anything after that, you have to pay it back. tongass would pass that in a heartbeat. -- congress would pass that in a heartbeat. you cannot keep a tab running with no way to shut it off. when theseing, people try to make laws about business, when they have never been in business. if you raise the minimum wage to seean hour, you will never an 18-year-old kid hired, a 16-year-old. coming into work late, being immature, helping them to learn

to earn a wage. i can hire an, adult and not have to worry about that. this problem in france, where you have an unemployment rate of youngsters of upwards of 35%. what they need to do is leave that alone. the bottom line is not getting people more money for putting a hamburger at mcdonald's. it is getting the better jobs. in all honesty, if we have farms out there that need strawberries picked and you do not have a job , and these are jobs that americans do not want, sorry, you stop paying people and you will see them work the jobs. level of the minimum wage, the $10.10, which the white house has said, is kind of an interesting choice because it has a negative impact. the congressional budget office and others say [no audio] will get a raise. at lower levels, it would not

have nearly as bad an economic drag, so why did they pick $10.10? i have not figured it out erie maybe it is a catchy figure, maybe it is something that will not go into law, so it is aspirational, but it is interesting they picked a number that has a downside impact. certainly, but they would argue is raising the minimum wage would help create better jobs and would give people more money in their pockets to go out and spend which would help the economy. the president spent a lot of time going to employers like costco that have higher wages for basic employees and try to say, this has been good for their bottom line, this has been good for their business, good for people working there. that is their argument. it is clear, there are economic arguments against raising it to that level, and that is something that they are not really happy to talk about. they are much more interested in

emphasizing the positive. the other point the caller made about keystone is worth discussing as well. the president has talked about the fact that this has become such a big issue for environmentalists and for industry that it has maybe been blown out of proportion by both sides, but it may create some jobs but not a number that industry says. it may be bad for the environment on some level in terms of the climate change impact from taking the oil out of the canadian tar sands, but not as bad as environmentalists say, because the oil will be extracted anyway. there are arguments on both side of the issues. i think we will continue to hear them for a while. guest: you watch the keystone debate and these folks have been fighting so hard and so long and the issues have been blown out of proportion on both sides, on job impact and environment. comeare so desperate to away with a win. so much time and energy has been invested into this.

host: a question from e-mail. sue writes in from new jersey. guest: short answer would probably be no. there is not a lot of anything forthcoming from this congress that is not necessary. it is something the republicans in the house want to talk about. they want to put together a package they can get through their chamber. we mentioned the memo that eric cantor sent out to the members outlining the next to the new months. a lot of talk about building an america that works, that is their catchphrase. that is very much about creating a jobs package. their goal is to get 218 votes in the house. when they are doing that, they are not looking at the senate or the white house, not looking at making a law, but sending a

message to americans who are frustrated. look, the republican party cares about this jobs issue. guest: it is important note, despite the controversies over the other issues we have discussed, the affordable care act, keystone, the environment, the election will almost always come down to the discussion about the economy. you will hear both sides pushing their ideas about creating jobs, minimum wage, as we discussed, but it comes up to that impasse. he will not get a bill passed in congress that either side is particularly happy about in terms of generating jobs because of the requirements to get support from a bipartisan senate and house. host: columbus nebraska, sean is on the democrats line. caller: thanks for taking my call. ,y concern about immigration

the immigration bill, is that republicans might go back to bill, is that republicans might go back to obama's campaign when he said [no audio] thank you for taking my call. guest: the caller is concerned that people -- they will backfire against obama, that he has not been able to do more on immigration. certainly, activists are citing the same argument. you may promises to us and we are not seeing them get made. in 2012, you saw the president make some choices during the midst of his reelection, in terms of helping the dreamers, who are the younger children of illegal immigrants who came to the country when they were so young and grown up as americans, giving them more options to stay

in the country. that ties into whether we could see a negative action on deportations. the truth is, the president would argue that he tried and that they worked very hard since he has come into office to do something big on immigration reform. he promised it again in 2012. it is absolutely on the top of their priority list, but he cannot do it by himself. fairborn, ohio. karen is on the line for democrats. caller: i have a couple of comments. their,as congress and really, nonworking schedule, we should only pay them for the days they are working [no audio] you get paid for the days you work, and they do get many as their carsar being paid on their leases and stuff.

my congressman, i could not tell you what he does, i never hear from him. he is never in the area, that i know of. --hink he worries more about then the rest of us. guest: who is your congressman? caller: i believe it is mike turner. guest: you are tapping into the frustration that voters have. or is not a lot of action. is there a jobs bill? probably not. immigration bill? probably not. if you keep on reading this and you see they are not in town, you will get frustrated. guest: if you are not already seeing it now in your home states, these congressmen and women coming back pushing hard for reelection. that whole campaign season also takes them away from washington and away from the need to take votes and work on legislation

and have some meaningful impact. guest: people talk about november is far away and giving up already, but so many important races are out there. may is a huge month for primaries. which part of it will be in control of those in washington, if they take the senate and the house? that will be determined in the next six weeks. key primaries in north carolina, kentucky, georgia i'm a that will determine who is not only in the senate, which parties, but what type of party. retired,nowe, who is and ted cruz, that is one of the swaps that happened in congress. that is a dramatic shift in the makeup of the conference and the party and what happens in washington. host: one thing you mentioned is the kentucky senate race. senator mitch mcconnell. playrole does that race specifically, and obviously him as senate majority leader -- minority leader?

a few weeks ago he stopped playing his role as public dealmaker. he stepped back a bit and let the senate work on its own. he was not taking a hands-on approach. it looks like he will be dispatched by his primary opponent. mitch mcconnell has had a history of going aggressively after his opponent. he came out this last week and announced that he had to basically defend himself to say that he was never a supporter of cockfighting. he went to a few events when that was happening. to say that you have to do this, probably not a good sign if you -- trying to be erected reelected to a senate seat. he has a double take and that he has to face, a top two democrat in the fall. mitch mcconnell is unpopular,

too, but the question is, can he get through that? he is certainly the favorite in the primary and the general. his reelection is definitely going to affect washington. guest: the fact that he is vulnerable at all is making democrats elevate. that makes it a high-profile race, not only because the senate is up for grabs in terms of who controls it, but he is such a powerful figure there. we talked earlier about the president's trip to asia. one of the big things that people were watching about whether a trade deal would emerge. given one that has not, has the trip been successful? the white house would say so. they bristled at some of the coverage from the media about the fact that it was not because of the trade deal. that said, there were expectations they would be able to advance this trade deal, particularly in japan even up till the last minute when they're waiting for the press

conference between the president and prime minister abe. they were hoping to have language to show specific progress, but they have struggled to make progress on that in asia. it is something that is very important to this white house. they think it would be good for the economy in the united states and in these countries he is visiting, and for the world economy. another thing, shane might be able to talk about this more. they arehe push that using internationally, it also faces some significant resistance in the united states, and not where you might think. coming from democrats in the congress. guest: it was one of the interesting things this year, after the state of the union, the president talked about moving this trade agreement about fast-track through congress as quickly as possible. the very next day, harry reid was at the white house working hand in glove. big al i normally. he comes and says, not happening, we are not taking it up.

it was like the white house was taken aback. he took the entire -- took the entire wind out of his sails on that deal. it is one of issues that labor doesn't like, and the democrats the finale don't want to be on the wrong side of labor. guest: you would not be surprised to hear that the white house is not emphasizing that angle. they feel that if we can just get this through, get some sort of deal signed with our partners in asia, we will be able to tackle the opposition in washington. but they haven't gotten that far in either place so it is still an open question. host: in delaware, bernard is on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. soquestion is how is it quick that congress can help ukraine with aid to another country, and we the people in

america are starting? the role for congress to turn the back for america. incursion,r russia's in nation, depending on who you ask, they tried to guarantee more loans to the country. there were some people who said that this is not a good idea, we are not going to get this money back, and tried to tap into that populist frustration across the country. rand paul is one of those people. he is positioning himself as the menu doesn't want to give american money away abroad. that it makes you an isolationist amanda does put him out of the mainstream of what the parties doing. guest: it's an interesting point that the caller raises. both congress and the white house avenue 2 jobs in terms of domestic policy and foreign policy, and the white house

would certainly argue that it is very important that ukraine feel the support of the united states both in terms of the loan guarantee but also just support dealinge of the u.s. with the challenges that russia is creating. the questions about if congress to move quickly on that but not on employment insurance or these other issues are fair questions. host: the president and nothing this morning that there will be additional sections on russia, announcing them later today. explain to us what we are looking at, as much as you know, and for you, shane, i'm curious as to the response from members of congress. guest: you know, there is, again, different factions within both parties, but the real pushes that they want to send a tin and say this is not ok with the american government. they talked about and eight bill being guaranteed. it looks like a

no-win situation in the short term and they are happy to let the president take the lead on these issues. sanctions we can expect to hear more about our additional asset freezes, additional travel bans for so-called cronies of vladimir putin and people close to him and the government. what we will not see at least not yet are what the white house calls rock, massive sanctions against specific parts of the russian economy, which could and almost certainly would reverberate against certain parts of the global economy, specifically europe. you are seeing some back-and-forth between the white house, u.s. government, and european allies in terms of how far to go with those sanctions. the united states wants to show a united front between g7 countries, european allies, and the united states on the sanctions, and the fact that they are telegraphing it more is one way to try to show that.

and there is no doubt that the sanctions will not be greeted in russia, but they will not go as far as they could. the united states is partially saying that this is how far we are going right now if you go and if you go any further in ukraine, we have more in our top drawer. host: virginia. lowell is on the line for independents. caller: thanks for taking my call. my comment to this moneys about those who come to work for us. how can an individual who claims to work for us as a delegate, senator, congressman, take the amount of money that they take and then all the free things that they acquire, it just smacks in the face. it is unequal. it is not in relation to what the typical median group of people in the united states are capable of making on a regular basis. it seems terribly unfair, and

all that -- excuse me -- all who you speak to, no matter how old it be granduldn't to just wipe the satellite -- wipe the slate clean and start all over? while it doesn't seem practical, it seems like a great idea. guest: and he is speaking to the figure, 68% of americans want to shop around for a new member of congress. a huge portion of congress is new. the tea party waves in 2010, new districts are drawn in 2012. the majority of congress has not been here since the first room of the bush administration. houston, texas, where ashley is on the line for democrats. caller: good morning, lady and gentlemen. i want to speak about the affordable care act. i think it is absolutely absurd. i spent 42 years working in a

hospital, 30 of them in the emergency center here. you wouldn't believe the people that are sitting there for hours and hours and hours because they don't have medical insurance. this is a county hospital. and they don't have medical insurance, and they are sitting there forever, and they are having heart attacks. trauma means trauma, and that means accidents, it means shootings, it means police shootings, this is what trauma is. but most emergency centers -- i spent 28 years and there -- they -- you havedicine to have a medicine clinic going on besides the trauma center because so many people are not insured. i think the affordable care act

is probably one of the greatest things that has ever happened in this country, and you can probably speak to any hospital employee that has worked in a trauma center, and they will let you know how this is needed. guest: and i think the white house would be very happy to hear this commentary, and it raises another question about costs. when people come into trauma centers or with some of these issues that the caller was referring to and they don't have insurance, that cost ends up being spread out to everybody else. that was one of the main arguments certainly that the president made working towards passage of the affordable care act, that we want to bring health care costs down and one way of doing that is making sure everybody is insured so that these costs don't get passed on to everybody else. host: let's go to morgantown, north carolina. paul is on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. an independent

journalist in western north carolina and i wrote extensively on environmental issues as well as economic issues. grows on a that wholedeal has led to a lot of problems in discussion here, and it has been the consolidation of huge power throughout western europe, canada, and north america into the trade organizations. they have used their power to form trade agreements, which deregulated corporations to the point that they can go all over the country and the world in these other countries and manipulate slave labor, no environmental controls, and bring stuff back to the united states and sell it. profit.ole lot higher products have gone up at the same rate was of the 1950's.

we are not saving money on products. the corporations are making more money and dodging labor laws and environmental laws and everything else and it has reduced the number of jobs and created discontent among the poor and immigrants -- host: caller, we are running a little bit short on time so i will let our guests respond to you. guest: i was just going to say, trade agreements are controversial. there is no question there are winners and losers when you open the borders economically. and there are folks who like there are losers and it is one of the reasons there is this challenge to mystically with creating a trade agreement with japan and other countries in asia. guest: i would also add to that whether or not they meet the desires and expectations of people in the labor community, labor standards, environmental standards are absolutely part of those negotiations. guest: and the mention of the slave labor -- there is not slave labor as part of american

trade agreements are brought. host: one more e-mail on this topic. host: more about the topic of discontent that we have been talking about so much, guys. guest: i was out in california and the sheer number of locations cycling through -- politicians cycling through the bay area to talk to the tech community was a surprising. i happened to be out there. that is where the money is. there's not as many people going to north dakota during a given break period, or minnesota. guest: we could take an entire hour to discuss the topic of money in politics. it is huge and plays a key role in these special elections and the presidential elections. host: couple minutes left. we go to marie in a new jersey

on the line for democrats. caller: yes, good morning. i'd like to -- --t: hey, marie, so unless? still with us? hello?aller: host: you are on. caller: first, i would like to say that we need politicians that are going to do what is best for america, all right? let's stop the political fighting. i understand the job still has been on the show since around 2011. my goodness, bring it to the floor and let the people vote for it that worked on us. it would be a better country if we stopped talking about politics and just talked about what america needs right now. it needs jobs, it needs health care, a needs benefits for unemployed people. this is the first time in this roof unemployment that they

didn't -- in the history of unemployment that they didn't extend it. it has been extended under republican presidents and democratic presidents. please, let's get real, let's look forward. thanks, guys. guest: we should make it clear that both shane and i are journalists and not represent political parties here. but what the caller said is something both political parties would've no doubt appreciate hearing. guest: politics has become sort of a team sport, and in team sports there's winning teams and losing teams and both sides especially here our test with being on the winning team, both in elections, in every legislative fight. bills,s a battle to win two in the post signing of the bill messaging -- to win the post-signing of the bill messaging. guest: whether you like it or not, politics is the engine

revenue of getting a lot of these policy things through. that is a big part of how washington works. addison, tennessee, ralph on our line for republicans. caller: i wanted to speak about -- obama refuses to admit that the unappointed rate is really closer to 20 or 25%. i do applaud his efforts to get minimum wage up to $10.10. i deliver pizza and stuff and i'm only making $4.25 an hour. about 1 and -- only 5 people -- they don't want to tip. tip 5 people don't want to on average. to thing has gone out for a lot has gone -- tipping out for a lot of people and deliverers need this wage to be

brought up. guest: he i talking about the slightly extra topic. in some cases you are getting paid well less than the minimum wage, below the federal minimum wage. jobou are working on a tip in some states you are making as little as two dollars an hour and those other people nobody's really talking about. guest: i'm not sure where the is,r is -- where the caller 20, 25% on a climate, but where -- 20, 25% unappointed, but the numbers are still too high. host: >> several live events tomorrow. treasury secretary jack lew will testify before a house appropriations subcommittee about the treasury department budget request for next year and sanctions against russia. that is on c-span3 at 10:00 a.m.

eastern. also on c-span3 at 1:30 p.m., members of two house affairs subcommittees will discuss the u.s.-russia nuclear negotiations in light of the situation in ukraine. secretary of state john kerry speaks the atlantic council. you can see that on c-span two at 1:30 p.m. eastern. c-span's newest book, sundays at eight. >> the normal trajectory of escape stories or of concentration camps towards is you have someone who comes from a sophisticated, civilized family. they are taken to the camp. all their other relatives are killed. in and into behave

human way to survive. and then they come out and they tell the story about a descent into help and survival -- into survival. his story is different because he was born in hell and thought it was home. at eight,s sundays now available at your favorite bookseller. toa discussion of how improve relations between the white house and congress. the bipartisan policy center commission on clinical reform hosted several former white house chiefs of staff, cabinet secretaries, and members of congress. this is an hour.

>> good afternoon. i want to extend a warm welcome to you in this beautiful library and museum. it is one of only 13 presidential libraries in america. it is a masterpiece. we like to say it is a national treasure in our midst where president kennedy's legacy lives on. today, we are marking and especially important occasion because this gathering is the very first event cosponsored with our new neighbors, the edward m kennedy institutes of the united states senate. i can't think of a more fitting occasion for the institutions that honor the lives and achievements of both resident candidate and senator edward m kennedy. it also seems fitting that you begin a conference about tackling a very big problem in our country. here in this monument to a president who come along with

his brothers, believed deeply in our government as a force for good, who had such extraordinary optimism and confidence in america and who believed that working together, americans could do big things. we could go to the moon. we could launch the peace corps, which they did within six months of the new administration. we could even achieve a nuclear test and treaty. it is worth noting that in 1962, 70% of americans said that they trusted washington most or all of the time. today, after decades of anti-government rhetoric, the number is at 20%. they give john f. kennedy the highest rating. even though 20% of americans today have living memory of