we will talk to tom cole about his call for a debate and vote on authorization for the military mission against isis. and congressman basera on his party's legislative agenda. host: we have a two hour "washington journal. the senate will be voting on loretta lynch to be the next attorney general. a confirmation could take place early this afternoon. for our first 45 minutes, we are asking viewers to weigh in on the nomination battle over loretta lynch. let us know whether you think the senate should confirm her as the next u.s. attorney general.

give us a call. republicans can phone in on -- a very good thursday morning to you after 166 days, loretta lynch getting a confirmation vote on the floor of the senate today. here is how it will take place. 9:30 this morning. the senate will join its session after a leader remarked. the debate will begin on the confirmation of loretta lynch. a two hour debate is expected around 11:45. motion to invoke cloture will be held. if it is invoked, there will be two hours of closed debate and the confirmation vote could come as early as 2:00 p.m. this

afternoon for both the final vote and the cloture motion. loretta lynch would only require a simple majority of those votin g to vote for her. due to the nuclear option that was invented 2013 by democrats on presidential nominees. that nomination revoked after republicans took over the senate chamber. that is the process that will happen today on the loretta lynch confirmation vote. our phone lines are open. here is a story about the lynchburg. -- the lynch vote. after that anti-human trafficking legislation that passed wednesday.

host: president obama expressing frustration for how long the process is taken. here is a bit from his statement last friday. president obama: what we still have is this crazy situation where a woman who everybody agrees is qualified. who has gone after terrorists, who has worked with police officers to get things of the street. who is trusted by the civil rights community and by police unions as being somebody who's fair and effective and a good

manager. nobody suggests otherwise. who was confirmed twice before by the senate for one of the biggest law enforcement jobs in the country. has been sitting there longer than the previous 7 attorney general nominees combined. and there's no reason for it. nobody can describe the reason for it beyond political gamesmanship in the senate. host: here is the reason the editorial board of "national review" gives for defeating the religious nomination in her piece out yesterday afternoon. they write --

supporters of hardly finished attacking opponents as racist before labeling them as sexist as well. more clamor would ensue were she voted down,s mode is not about a small matter of political disagreement. it is about the principle of constitutional order. so the question for republicans is, will they be a party to fight to withhold it? we want to get your thoughts on this nomination fight that has gone on for 166 days. don is up first in clifton, virginia. line for republicans. caller: i think it is disgusting she would be up for consideration. after eric holder, it's kind of like obama was rubbing it in

our faces that he is going to go into another person based on identity politics -- a black female. the hsbc banking scandal where there were billions of dollars being laundered on behalf of drug cartels and terrorist groups -- [indiscernible] that is something investigated. i cannot believe she is up for a vote. host: do you think that during her confirmation hearings that senators explore that issue enough with her? caller: not at all. i think republican senators are afraid of being called racist and so they are willing to go with the criminal. it is sickening. she is supposed to be the highest law enforcement officer in the lab. she's up there saying that illegal aliens have just as much right to jobs as american citizens. host: in clifton, virginia, this morning. we are taking your comments on

facebook page. don says "finally. it should have happened long before now. too many in the senate who do not understand how to govern>' .:"" darlene writes, we might have to deal with it in vote in a republican president. eric holder is bad. she is worse. bite the bullet is what darlene adams writes. we want to hear from our viewers. the confirmation vote happening as early as 2:00. the debate starting to happen in the senate after the senate joint its session today at 9 :30. eric in georgetown, kentucky line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. my comment is about the amnesty. that keeps being referred to as amnesty. and it's not.

it is a two-year plan. it does not give them the right to stay here permanently. it is just long enough for congress to get their act together. and pass some type of immigration reform. and that's all i wanted to say. host: phillip's up next, orlando, indiana, on our line for independents. good morning. caller: they should not vote for her. host: why is that? caturn down your tv when you are talking. we can hear you. caller: she is not the constitution. that is my reason. host: what he think she's not for the constitution?

caller: let's look at the hearings. let's question her. she was totally -- she was with barack obama. sigh. he went against the constitution. i just believe that she is not the person we should have been there. host: marguerite is up next in massachusetts. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm calling because i would like to make a comment as a grandmother. what do i say to my grandchildren when politicians i don't care if they are democrat or republican decide what laws they will obey and enforce. i was really appalled at the

brazen attitude at the hearing. when she could say what laws she subscribed to and what laws she would not. that is the basic issue from me. host: are you speaking to the president executive actions on immigration? caller: no, i'm talking about loretta lynch's comment made at her hearing. host: in your comments about the president's actions? caller: it was not just her support for the president. she was asked and made a statement that she thought everyone even an illegal alien told her that's not her term, it's mine. everyone has a right to work and i have to wonder if we won't enforce the laws on immigration will they go after certain employers if they don't like who they hire? it is a two-sided sword and i want to know if it is -- if there is a law on the books there would not enforce it, get

it off, or enforce it. just pretending we have laws is not working anymore. it is undermining respect for law. host: some members of congress are weighing in as well on twitter. over the past 24 hours, senator dianne feinstein says we must act to confirm our next attorney general. loretta lynch has waited long enough. she knows it has been 54 days since loretta lynch's confirmation hearing in the senate, noting that the previous several attorney general nominees seven attorney general nominees, waited a combined 24 days from their confirmation hearing. it will be 55 days today when she gets her vote on the floor. a few other members of congress, ryan ziggy wrightson loretta lynch is disregard for the

bounds of the presidency proves she is a questionable take at best. nancy, the minority leader in the house says americans have waited, it's time for the senate to confirm now. senator tim kaine experiences focused fair, loretta lynch has all the attributes of a qualified attorney general. upper marlboro maryland is next. lydia is waiting on our line for democrats. caller: i suggest the lady from massachusetts tell the truth that this country has never lived up to the constitution which he seems to be so proud of. loretta lynch should have the nomination and should be the first on the docket when they came back from the reset. harry reid could've had the vote on the nomination. the new majority leader coming in postponed it. they waste all that time on the

pipeline, three weeks on the homeland security. and three weeks on the human trafficking bill. they were hoping that she would give up and withdraw her nomination, but they don't know black women. we are tough and we don't give up. that's what they were hoping for. she is qualified. host: do you think it was a mistake by harry reid when democrats were still in charge to wait during the lame-duck session for this? caller: yes, it was a mistake. this is long past due and i watched the entire hearing. they asked her no questions because she has been confirmed. the whole hearing is about eric holder, criticizing him. asking what you would do different, she said she is loretta lynch. thank you. host: that is talking about the

previous confirmation hearing that loretta lynch has been a part of for her attorney general worked in new york. and her background as well. eugene robinson would agree with lydia's comments that it is about time. he put his peace out yesterday afternoon. he said in a sane world, the republican senate whatever prepare months ago but senate has not been around here -- sanity has not been around here in a long time. she is a tough and effective u.s. attorney and a strong manager. no one doubts that she is capable of serving or fails to appreciate the importance of the job. joan agrees in california on our line for independents. caller: good morning i love america, everyone says god bless

america. i took a trip around the world for one year. this is the best country in the world and we voice say god bless america but i don't know why these people in this country are the most racist people on the planet. host: 20 say that? caller: because they are. other law enforcement agencies of european descent. all of them, from the top to the bottom. host: we go on to patricia, we are talking about loretta lynch's confirmation vote today. patricia is in brooklyn, new york. the line for democrats. caller: good morning. brooklyn is in the house. i just want to know if this is related to willie lynch. host: i don't know the background on that, but why do you ask? caller: i'm listening.

host: you have to turned on your tv. caller: i just wanted to know if he she is related to willie lynch. host: hartford connecticut line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. my concern is as a republican and a voter, people calling in all these times setting the constitution. i have to say they were violating the constitutional rights of the citizen, including african-americans. why do they stand on the constitution when they don't understand it? the government local governments i think it is an anomaly for them to call this woman as one is not -- as

someone that is not following the constitution. people during the civil rights movement the schools it's just -- i am a republican but i just don't understand how the people in this country always cite the constitution or the second amendment never the 13th. host: bringing up the president as part of his stay in the everglades and florida as part of his efforts to mark earth day. here's the front page of miami herald. obama urges quick action on the everglades. some of his comments, talking about the threat of climate change. the world and the united states.

here's a bit from his remarks. president obama: climate change can no longer be denied. it cannot be edited out. it cannot be omitted from the conversation. action can no longer be delayed. that's why i have committed the united states to lead the world in combating this threat. host: if you want to watch more you can go to our website at c-span.org and you can see the president's full statements they are. speaking of others marking earth day with statements and comments, they include senator james inhoffe. he is the chairman of the senate public works committee, i released a statement from the committee yesterday that reads in part on the 45th anniversary of earth day, we should celebrate great strides.

our air is the clean as it has ever been. unfortunately, the obama administration continues to downplay these successes and said focusing its rhetoric and resources on trying to solve the theory of man-made global warming with extremely costly regulation. the majority of americans do not buy into the scare tactics. they continue to be concerned with issues such as the economy, job creation, and the ever-growing size and scope of the federal government. senator james in half -- inhofe on earth day. we want to hear from our viewers on the confirmation vote on loretta lynch. you can watch it on c-span two. harless from staten island, new york. -- carl. caller: my opinion on the matter is the attorney general is one

of the most important positions. my point of view is it's a matter of trust, not a black and white issue. nothing to do with race. in my case, i was a volunteer on a political campaign and i found that i had my tax returns disappear. also, a third party had provided information to the department of labor. after i was furloughed from a federal job. there is what we call the existence of lists in our country that are being administered by the justice department. there were veterans being placed on certain lists to prevent them from doing this or that. it is an fringing on their rights. this is the type of tactic that was employed by the nazis during world war ii. it is for a common in the justice department and that's what i would like to say. this is a matter of trust and mrs. lynch is the absolute worst

person to be and the position of the united states attorney general. there'll be a backlash, 23 million veterans are alive today and they will recover that. it is a shame that this is the best party that can be brought forth for the united states. host: you're calling in from our line for democrats. who would you trust? who could rebuild your lack of trust in the justice department? caller: offhand, i would say somebody perhaps may be rudy giuliani but there is no way in hell he is coming out of retirement. some governor, perhaps. i don't know and have not given it much thought. i have made reports to mrs. lynch's office with respect to what i believe is domestic surveillance that i was the subject of. i had my tax returns disappear although the irs received my check.

they said my tax return witnessing so i'm positive i have been targeted. it is ridiculous if it is happening to small fries like me. it is going on in a major way throughout our society. host: the irs report is out yesterday from the house ways and means committee saying the irs is having problems stemming from bad budgeting and spending on administrative costs, the story is making waves. especially here in d.c.. republicans found the irs spent millions of dollars on employee bonuses. they say it could have paid -- footed the bill for millions of customer calls. also cuts and user fees allocated to customer support another area the irs could have better utilized its already tight budget. there is no denying that the

agency has seen smaller budgets lately. congress has cut the budget by more than a billion dollars over the past five years. the other stories to show you around the country, and around the world, several stories about concerns on drones. this is from the new york times. a small propeller driven drunk possibly tainted with radioactive minerals was found on the prime minister's office in japan, unsettling officials who said they are reviewing antiterrorism measures in response. the officials said they don't know who flew the drone. it was two feet in width with four propellers. they did not know how long the drone had bid on the roof. another drone story this one also in the new york times. air mail via drones is vexing for prison contraband, landing inside prison walls. the story noting that the high-tech version of smuggling a file into a prison and a

birthday cake, it underscore the headache that drones are creating for law enforcement and national security officials who a ballots they have few if any ways of stopping them. those stories are in the new york times today. also, the story about the japanese drone making headlines. a lot of focus since hillary clinton's announcement for her candidacy for the president focusing on her clinton foundation and money that has come in. this story focuses on the company uranium one, the sale to russian control. it allows 1/5 of all uranium production in the united states to be controlled by this russian company since uranium is considered a strategic asset. the story notes the deal had to be approved by the committee composed of representatives from a number of united states agencies.

when i feel when through, one of the agencies eventually signed off on the state department. it was headed at the time by hillary clinton. as the russians gradually assumed control of the uranium one company and separate transactions, the flow of cash made its way to the clinton foundation. uranium one's chairman use the company to make donations totaling $2.5 million, a lengthy story and the new york times exploring the sale of this uranium company. those are just a few of the headlines in today's papers. mike is up next, calling in from monroeville, ohio. you're on the washington journal. your thoughts on the confirmation votes for loretta lynch. caller: we don't have all day to talk about the problems that are going on. mrs. lynch, i have more respect for her. she was involved in the world

bank as far as them getting caught laundering the cartel money. nobody went to jail and as usual, the rich just get find and that's it. if you think that mrs. lynch is confirmed, since she is mrs. clinton's skeleton in the closet being busted open, is there anything about that? if the irs, that's in the situation. government as usual is throwing money toward the problem thinking it will go away. now it is going into certain people's pockets. which are deep. they're keeping their mouse quiet in order to run this corrupt system. how can you have people being handpicked in positions of authority and expect to turn around and prosecute the criminals that are put in these positions? it's not a question of being racist. i can revert -- this is ridiculous.

when bush got caught lying as well as cheney and everybody else you are not american. i'm a veteran. i've given half of my life to this country. it is a point of honesty. the man from new york, i'm certain that if you turn against the government, you are put on a list. it is a proven fact that the irs went after certain people and tried to shut down obama. people will have to wake up. we are the only ones i can solve this, we can't let these criminals solve their own problems. host: same question to you. who is somebody you would trust to run the justice department? is there a person out there that you would like to see as the presidents pick for attorney general? caller: the plain truth is gonzalez holder, and now this lynch, we cannot trust any of these people. i'm 53 years old. i know what's going on.

we are in trouble. the ttp thing, i thought we were allowed to examine these papers that are going to be as far as our children's future. i am looking out for my grandkids. i have to go, i'm just getting upset. host: you mentioned the ttp. here's the front hill newspaper. their reporting on the obama trade fight. this is the headline on the front page. the ttp, transpacific partnership trade deal is something we will talk about later in today's program. this is by congressmen have your by sarah, the ranking member of the social security subcommittee. -- javier basera. we have 15 minutes left on the

topic of loretta lynch. julius is up next from greensboro, north carolina. caller: good morning. it is about time that they confirm loretta lynch. mitch mcconnell is another jesse helms. that project is reciting the constitution. i want to see ted cruz's birth certificate and also marco rubio's person -- birth certificate. they are both running for president. host: tony is up next in texas. a line for independents. caller: i feel like because of loretta lynch's views, we are having a major heroin problem in the

united states like you have never seen because of allowing the border to be open. it is coming over in here. i am seeing this going on down here. i see it for myself. there is no telling how many drug skim over the border because of her views. we have lost our integrity as a nation. we are the subject of bad movies of the bad people, the corrupt nation. we are not a nation of honor anymore because of the leaders that run this country. this is not fair. the rights of the american people has been taken away from us. it isn't because she is black or female. it is because of her views that are hurting america. all of these commonsense views that are so ridiculous, they are

killing us. because they get money in their pockets, they are willing to look the other way. we need a hero out there that is willing to stand up to this crap . all of our politicians, they are all corrupt. host: you mentioned your concern with her support of the president's policy on immigration. do you think the president will ever nominate somebody who doesn't agree with his views on such a major issue as immigration? caller: as long as he uses non-commonsense stuff because it is not fair to the other immigrants who do their time, who do what they are supposed to do to get their place in this country. you cannot just open the doors to anybody which allows who know what to come across that border.

it isn't like they are strip-searched and everything is searched when this happens. they are just coming over in hordes. people don't realize what was brought over at that time. we are going to see all the crap the brought with them and it will not be good for america. host: bill of rights in on our page that he had enough of the attorney general and his lawbreaking or refusal to enforce laws. lynch is the same and can set forever without a vote. another says she cannot be worse than holder. dennis in california on our line for republicans, what do you think about that? caller: i don't think she should be confirmed. i don't think anybody that obama nominates should be confirmed

because his track record so far has been terrible. there hasn't been anything he has done that has been great. the only thing i can see he has done his make history for himself as being the worst president ever. he has destroyed this country forever. should have prosecuted him along with holder and everybody else at the lawbreaking. the politicians and what they are doing now is disgusting. host: what is the lawbreaking you are talking about? what are you most concerned about? caller: fast and furious. assumes there is more to more -- there is more turmoil and questions that do not get answered. it has been six years of

lawlessness as far as politicians go, republicans included. no one has the juevos to stand up and uphold the constitution way it is supposed to be. it is getting quite disheartening. host: is anyone out there who you think could uphold the constitution the way you would like it to be upheld? caller: well, the way the congress has been performing lately, there should be term limits. we need to change politicians quite often because they get into a comfortable seat and just do what they have to do to stay in office. the whole system needs to be revamped.

there is a few people giving us hope, but until we get a whole lot more of them that are willing to stand up, i think we are in for quite a decline. host: who are a few of those people? caller: i don't know if it is politics are not, i would have to continue to watch what they do. they have spoken up, but we have to see if they are going to stick with it. i will hold my comments until i can see if they really are fighters. host: dennis in bakersfield, california. why the stakes in 2016 are so high.

host: if you want to read this piece it is in this morning's wall street journal. also there is a piece from republican louisiana governor bobby jindal holding firm against gay marriage.

he says save your breath. i hold the view that has been in the consensus for our country that marriage is between one man and one woman. polls say the american consensus is changing but i will not change my view on this matter even if it becomes a minority opinion. time for a few more calls. james is in arlington, virginia on the line for independents. caller: i am a libertarian and i would suggest you make libertarians and green may be a separate phone line. in regards to eric holder and what has gone on with the justice department, this justice department has had laundered drug cartel money to the tune of billions of dollars in nobody goes to jail. $3 billion in the pharmaceutical firm and nobody goes to jail.

this just goes to show you loretta lynch was instrumental in the decision not to send anybody to jail with hsbc. republicans and democrats did not talk on this. the gravy train of large corporations is making it so the small person gets hit with an anvil, but those who commit gigantic crimes, no one ever goes to jail. host: don is up next calling in from california on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. this vote on loretta lynch was never about loretta lynch. it was about the democrats trying to push their agenda in the senate and the republicans trying to fight them on it. if you look at it one of the reasons this vote is coming up is because the democrats finally

caved on trying to push government-funded abortions and human trafficking bill. now that the democrats have given up on that, the senate republicans are giving a vote on loretta lynch. she is the best we can expect out of president obama for an attorney general. he will never have an objective constitutionalist in that position. it will be another liberal pushing obama's agenda and covering for president obama covering his rear end. host: check from michigan on the line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning. i am calling and i don't have my tv on so i cannot hear you. i am calling about you and the girl yesterday. i sit and watch them every time.

somebody has something to say but if they are not bashing obama, you cut them off short. i watch this everyday. host: we try to hear from everybody but go ahead. caller: you let the last two or three people talk that are bashing obama and bashing loretta lynch. they sit up and spew their hatred for half the show. every time some and he called and like the lady from africa you cut them off. they say two or three words. anybody that says anything about racism in this country, you cut them off. host: what do you want to say about the loretta lynch vote today? caller: i want to say that it is ridiculous how long she has taken or how long it has taken congress to bring it to a vote. to try to say there is no racism involved in that, i say anybody

that says that is a racist. they need to look into the mirror. if they want to keep trying to claim there is no racism, this congress is george wallace all over again. a lot of people forgot george wallace, and that is what you have today. george wallace finally has control of the government. thank you. host: frank is up next in lancaster, pennsylvania on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning to you. i am calling -- do you hear me? i can hear you. i am calling to say i really fell in love with eric holder and i feel as if the reason they don't like the man is because he brings up issues and he will not back down and stands his ground. the way they keep talking about our president and they way they

keep neglecting to give this lady a vote -- there is a certain amount of racism down here. that is coming from these people who do not want to see america come together as it should. i love them totally and completely and they have to understand all the issues around town. and just doesn't suit one person. it is for everyone. they are talking about illegal aliens and everything like that. they have to realize that like back in the 1920's, these folks around here have gone from gangsters to getting their sons and daughters and grandchildren into this thing here. the lumen not is messing our world -- the illuminati is messing up our world. host: one of the stories is the lead story in the washington post.

upcoming showdown over guantanamo. host: if you want to read more on that story it is in the washington post. the bobby jindal piece on religious liberty and his views on gay marriage is in today's "new york times" not the wall street journal. robert on the florida line for independents.

caller: the baldheaded moderator that is on the program right now -- c-span used to be relevant. it is not relevant anymore. he is a pro-right-wing republican and he shuts everybody off that has an opinion that is not bashing president obama with the democratic party or any issue that is left of center. as far as c-span being an issue or a show that is relevant anymore, because of this fool this moderator, it is not relevant anymore. this is the last time you'll hear from me. host: thanks for the call robert. that will do it for the first segment of "washington journal"." up next we will be talking with congressman tom cole about the authorization for use of military force against isis in iraq and syria and where that sits in the u.s. congress now.

later, many democrats taking issue with the president's possible fast-track authority and the legislation moving through congress in part of those trade deals. we get thoughts from javier becerra later in today's program. we will be right back. ♪ >> this saturday is the 2015 white house correspondents association annual dinner. live coverage of the event on c-span starting at 6:00 p.m. eastern with the guest arrival along the red carpet.

president obama will address more than 2600 attendees in the ballroom. this is entertainment is a member from saturday night live. this is saturday starting at 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. here are a few of the festivals we will be covering on c-span2's but tv. this weekend we will be in maryland's state capital hearing from alberto gonzales and james rice son. next we will hear from tom davis and mark frost and david axelrod. we will close out may in new york city. than on the first week in june we are live for the chicago tribune printers fast including a three-hour live in depth

program. that is this spring on c-span2's with tv -- book tv. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we welcome congressman tom cole who is circularly a letter to his house colleagues saying congress is shirking its congressional duty when it comes to the issue of new war power's authorization against the islamic state. congressman cole some members of congress have demanded a vote on this issue dating back to august after the original strikes took place against the islamic state. why hasn't this issue come for a vote? guest: a couple of reasons. the president when he began a separation said he did not need congressional authorization. the 2000 1-2002 resolution for use of force in afghanistan and iraq covered it.

secondly the democratic leadership did not want to have a vote. it is a divisive issue. a difficult issue for any member but more so for democrats. speaker boehner recommended to the president to bring authorization down and let us go through a normal process. again democratic leadership did not want to do that. republicans in the senate did not want to do that either. they got put off. the president eventually did ask for authorization in the state of the union and sent a proposed authorization message was just the way you normally do it. you don't just ask. the process has begun. we had hearings on armed services and foreign relations but there is no resolution to it. there is no point where we need to mark of the resolution and put something on the floor. host: you are a close friend of speaker boehner.

why doesn't he bring it to the floor next week? guest: he is worried about a couple of things. there is a lot of democratic opposition which is pretty unusual. the president is essentially a war president without a war party. a lot of his folks will not vote for anything. there are others you have to so finely nuanced the resolution things like we don't have an enduring ground mission and what does that mean. usually name an objective and either reach it or negotiate a settlement with the adversary to get in place. a lot of democratic opposition. on the republican side there are two problems. there is a basic just sit -- basic distrust of the president. number two they want a stronger resolution. i know the speaker believes what the white house has proposed is weaker than what he has now. it is fine not to send in ground troops.

we would hope we could complete the mission without doing that. when you are ruling options off the table and you are going to war, most of our members take this is a mistake. a lot of our members don't like the idea of reauthorization. they will lay it out there. it sets up an artificial deadline. one who served in iraq told me if we do that, we would have never done the surge. public opinion changed but if you are prosecuting a war, there will be ups and downs but you ought to continue a mission until completed. host: the authorization would come three years later. what would you like to see and what is the right authorization? guest: to me at a simple. isis is a clear and present danger to the united states of america and its allies. the president has authorized to use all available means to degrade and destroy a terrorist group. up to him to choose the means.

congress isn't good at micromanaging a war. to give him the maximum flexibility would extend to a successor because it is unlikely he would achieve that objective in the amount of time the president has left. host: talk about the effort with conga's been shift -- with congressman schiff. guest: besides all of the politics and the ins and outs of the war and mission itself, we share a common concern about congress slowly giving up its warmaking authority. the constitution is pretty clear. if we engage in military operations of this scope and size and severity, there ought to be a congressional authorization. congress is finding it easier and easier to ignore that and let the executive branch do what it wants. we did that in libya. whenever acted and we should have in my view. we have a libyan crisis because we partly destabilized the

country. we didn't do that in this case against isis. when the president thought about doing something in syria, there was a debate if you go to congress or not. congress treats these things like hot potatoes and wants to get rid of them. when you are elected, that is your responsibility as a member of congress. even if it is difficult and this one is, you should be willing to stand up and vote whichever way you think is appropriate and go home and explain it to your people otherwise you are just onlookers and second-guess her's. -- and second-guessers. host: you are looking to put pressure on house members. if the senate moves forward with an authorization for use of military force among would that be enough to get the house moving? guest: it probably would. be house has been more prepared to move. it does take both houses.

that has been one of the arguments. why proceed by yourself? you have to have some mechanism over in the senate. we both feel about this that strongly about this. while we don't have an agreement, there are a lot of folks disagree with the president's recommended authorization. that is what we have a markup for. you have a debate and cast votes and come out with a final product to put on the floor. or we can put several products. i don't have any problems putting of his recommended authorization and whatever the committee decided to do. let us treat it just like we do a budget with several votes. at the end of a day, come to a consensus around one option and move forward. host: the president has recommended authorization sent over from bury 11 to congress -- sent over february 11. you agree it is dead on arrival in the house?

guest: i have enormous respect for him, he is a vote counter. a lot of republicans don't think this is strong enough. that has been one of the leadership's concerns but i would argue let us just put it out there and see what happens. i would prefer a much stronger authorization, but i would support the president's recommended authorization if i couldn't get something stronger. if we are going to exercise military power on this scale thousands of airstrikes against isis, we have a reintroduced troops on the ground in iraq. not an eight combat role, but there is no such thing as being safe in iraq. it is a 360 degree battlefield. our adversaries ought to know we are united and that the

president has support. host: congress battle plan hangs back. we want to hear from our viewers questions and comments for tom cole. kathleen is up first from chicago, illinois on the line for democrats. caller: good morning. i want to talk to representative coal. i hear you said you were circulating a letter around because congress is shirking their duties on moving the authorization for isis. where is the letter you are circulating around for congress

shirking their duties for doing something for the american people? will put you all in office to help the country. all you do is sit up and want to go to war with everybody. the people that are paying your salaries, you are doing nothing. you are passing no job bills. to keep talk about what president obama did not do or is not doing. you have been in their since november. you said you all were going to do change, but what have you done other than war. you are worried about isis but we have people over here hungry and homeless. guest: first of all it is the president that made the decision to send forces against isis, not congress. he made the right call, by the way, i am not being critical. the president tried to avoid being engaged in the war for a long time. it is only when they broke out of syria he felt the need to intervene militarily.

in terms of congress not doing anything, i would beg to differ. congress is working this week to pass a budget that has passed to the house and the senate has passed their version are actually excuse me next week. congress fixed a dock fix. we moved terrorism insurance. we are on the verge of having a legislatively productive spring. congress is passing a lot more legislation than it has in a long time. that's a good thing. doesn't mean we can ignore our international response abilities. whether we should be waging a war without congressional approval, the president deserves the support he asked for. i would probably give him more authority than he has asked for. host: what is victory look like in iraq and how do you ensure

the u.s. does not have to go back there if isis is defeated to keep in other isis-type group from coming up? guest: iraq looks like the restoration -- that is legitimate government. it was elected by the iraqi people but they are in the midst of a terrorist group that is not just wrecking individual targets but taken over some of the territory, almost half of the country. and area about the size of indiana, the second-largest city in america. they are controlling the economic infrastructure. they have iraqi soldiers and she malicious and help from the iranians -- and shia militias and help from the iranians. you want to measure terrorists are not free to plot and execute

attacks against them, their neighbors, or ultimately the u.s. and western targets. host: but is go to ontario canada where dennis waiting on the line for republicans. caller: thank you. i like my american neighbors and if anyone can make a difference better in this world, i think it is you guys. i look at the situation, and i have studied it reading the history of it. i am wondering even if you were able to wipe out isis completely with no civilian casualties and no military casualties and all your troops would be home within a week what would change? there would be a vacuum left. i know you senator are a student of history and you know how the borders were drawn artificially.

as long as you have these groups that cannot live together and are artificially grouped together, realistically, what do you think is a solution? guest: that is a series of really great questions and observations. you are clearly the student. as you suggested, the state system that exists in the middle east is a product of post-world war i european powers dividing up the region into a series of colonies and mandates an independent kingdoms where they had influence. the borders are extremely artificial. we are probably and a time where the artificial borders are beginning to dissolve. i don't think we will ever see syria as syria again. we may never see iraq as iraq again. the kurdish area which is very pro-american and not engaged in terrorist activity is quite the opposite and the ally of the

u.s.. the sunni areas were isis is strong has no allegiance to a shia government. they probably will be in the years ahead adjustments on the borders. we have some great allies. jordan is a wonderful ally of the u.s. and the kurds are allies. the saudi's are allies. it is not as if everybody in the region is an enemy.

supporting, you know hamas in lebanon, or -- so we have a multiplicity of interest in the area. geographical political, with the energy. i think trying to create a measure of stability, trying to contain the violence within it and ultimately supporting friends and allies that have a common vision -- basically the american interest in the region. host: does that mean you would support an independent separate

kurdistan at some point? guest: both democratic and republican president have come to that conclusion. the kurds are the largest ethnic group without a country in the world. and their territory and the population stretches through a multitude of countries in the region. so if you have an independent kurdish state, does that mean you'll have problems keeping kurds in turkey? i think it is a complex issue. i would certainly support an autonomous kurdish region, which is basically what the have now. the -- could it become independent something? it might. but that is not certainly something anybody in the government in turkey wants to see, the government in iraq wants to see. so if it is going to establish independence, it is going to be gradual. host: illinois is up next.

the line for democrats. death, good morning. caller: good morning. i listened a few times before and i agree with some of the things that he said. but i think he's being disingenuous when he says that the democrats alone don't want to come to a vote on this work. i think there needs to be a vote. i think there needs to be discussion. but what i hear from republican to i couldn't name right now a lot is, you know, the president has the power to do all that he is doing. and that is the general overall. one more thing. in response to what the woman was saying, the budget as it stands now, the republican budget, do not favor the middle class. and you just end a day and a half to two days -- just spent a day and half to two days about the state tax, which affects very few people and it takes money out of our budget.

my tax dollars are going to pay for that. so i don't think you are getting a lot done in congress that helps the middle class. guest: a couple of questions. first of all, i think democratic leaders didn't want to vote. and i think that is the biggest reason why we didn't. but to your point, you're right in a sense that there are a lot of politicians who don't want to vote on this. it is much easier to be critical and not be responsible for anything. once you vote, you put your fingerprints on a recommendation, whether it is for or against. frankly, if we are going to spend the kind of money and run the risks we are in the region because of -- we have been very fortunate and we have not lost any pilots. but you can't count on that lasting forever. look at the thing that happened to the jordanian pilot. what if an american airplane was shot down or has a mechanical problem?

so, again, i think congress needs to think through, argue through, and frankly go home and tell the american people in their respective districts to say this is either worth it or not worth it. on the point about the budget, look, a budget document is a partisan statement of what you think priorities ought to be. no democrat is ever going to vote for a republican budget and vice versa. but at the end of the day, it is not the law either. law is individual actions that involve the president and he has decided them. so i think you're seeing cogs beginning to get some things done. congressional action is never rapid, or seldom rapid. it is not supposed to be. this is designed to be a system of checks and balances. you are going to have differences of opinion on the issue, but look, the budget deficit, or $.4 trillion in 2010, under $500 billion today.

it has actually come down. there have been a series of compromises, providing more revenue, cuts in spending, those have been pretty tough victories. and this fix that just happened, that has been a problem that has been around for almost two decades and it was a bipartisan compromise between nancy pelosi and john boehner, the two most unlikely negotiating partners. but they did something good and i got overwhelming support on both sides of the aisle. we had a human trafficking bill passed the senate unanimously. it got caught up in other things, but it is a big piece of legislation. beretta lynch will be -- loretta lynch will be confirmed, i assume, today. so things are starting to happen. i think it is at an accelerating place. i think you'll see a larger budget deal between the

president and the congress. that is a good thing, not a bad thing. host: some headlines on this issue you're talking about of congress moving on a few issues. signs are mounting in the senate bipartisan backing for trade packs. how long will it last? is the question posed by the "wall street journal." we have about 10 minutes left. mike is waiting to talk to from richmond, virginia. a republican. mike, good morning. caller: yes, a republican kind of reluctantly. i respect what the congressman a saying here about the authorization for the use of military force. but i just wonder, are we ever going to see the day when congress asserts its powers under the concept of separation of powers? just really come out and say, you know what? there are a lot of things to do.

and stop calling it things that are not. in other words, if you guys want to go to work, pass a declaration of war did say what it is. -- and say what it is. i want to cut it short on that because something is kim to mind based on other things that -- else came to mind based on some of the things that you folks were talking about. it is a disheartening thing to hear so many people colin making this about whether or not people like the president, or whether or not people like what the president looks like. for a lot of us who are republicans, a lot of us who think that the rule of law actually mean something, all we are asking is for both parties every elected official to just say, hey, these other job descriptions that are given to us in the body of law that governs the government. the thing about people in the constitution is that they don't

understand or don't respect the fact that the constitution is the laws that govern the government. and i'm just wondering, are we ever going to see somebody, somewhere take the bull by the horns and say, you know what? if i'm a congressman, i am going to function within that weird it on the president, i'm going to function within that aired guest: i think -- within that. guest: i think congress is trying to do that. you have 535 people up there that represent different jurisdictions i belong to different parties. so the idea that one person is going to be able to dictate for very long in the congress doesn't occur very often. and probably with good cause. in terms of the president again, i'm not sure specifically what you are talking about. i would argue that he has over reached on several emmy -- instances.

the executive order that he laid out his not being implemented because the court has put a stay on it. they are deciding whether his actions were constitutional. this happened before, on appointments to the national labor relations board. they did something that congress thought was unconstitutional. they won the case, 9-0. so the checks and balances work. but this is still an extraordinarily free, decent, and frankly much more prosperous place than it was just a few years ago. the deficit is coming down. it is still the place that goodness gracious, if you want to leave your home, you probably want to leave it to come to america. we have millions of people who think this must be the best place in the world to live. again, i just am believe in the gloom and doom that government

never works, that everything is terrible, that the country is going to hell in a handbasket. nothing i see on the horizon tells me that that is the case. host: south carolina is up next. roger is waiting. for democrats. roger, good morning. go ahead, roger. caller: yes, i would like to ask mr. cole -- he said that they pass the budget for 2016? well, he did not put in their -- since i am on social security, disability worked 47 years of my life and destroyed my back. the republican party in congress is -- gutting medicare and wants to privatize the rest in their so-called budget. also, they want to get rid of food stamps, medicaid. so they are talking about strengthening these programs.

-- the american people. and also, the war -- host: roger, let's the congress let the -- let's let the congressman respond to that. guest: i will say this, the republican budget does not get rid of those things. let's take food stamps. spending on food stamps doubled under president bush and has basically doubled again under president obama. nobody has proposed eliminating them. people have talked about how do slow down the growth when one about -- one out of every seven americans is on food stamps? you would expect it to go up when you are in a recession. you're expected to go down when unemployment goes down. in terms of medicare and medicaid, look, those programs are going bankrupt.

they are going to go bankrupt. the gentleman on the social security, disability right now that goes bankrupt in a year. so we better make some changes. social security ultimately runs through the treasury fund and every person on it will get a cut. fix it now. make it stable for the long-term. there are a number of proposals out there, but frankly, it is always a tough thing to do. we have a lot of people who want to make no changes, even though the programs are going bankrupt. i think we ought to be sitting down right now and pushing through legislation on medicare, medicaid. a couple budgets actually propose real solutions. and republicans have voted for it. there is no democratic alternative, by the way. it is just, we are going to keep on autopilot. unfortunately, if it is on autopilot, it is going to go bankrupt. the president has never put a --

anything on the table nor have democrats in general. i think it is a big, national dialogue that we have to have. we have a big bill, the democrat from maryland, to try and set on a commission, make it bipartisan . it would have to have a bipartisan vote. may congress vote on it up or down. i can tell you what i think the elements would be in it because we have looked at this problem. it is a math problem, pretty easy to solve. but you will have to do a couple things that people aren't going to like. but congress ought to be willing to do that, to take what is arguably the most important social program the government has ever put together. host: have you been to edmund, oklahoma? guest: i have, many times. host: david is waiting in edmund , the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning

congressman. thank you for taking my call. my son, daughter, and grandchildren are among your constituents. guest: oh, great! caller: i am in support of your initiative to expedite this, congressman, and i would like to make a comment and i will listen to your comments off-line. but i'm a little disappointed in some of my federal -- fellow americans i hear calling in this morning. i hear them say, you know, set this aside and look more about me. there is an adage -- a man who is not prepared to defend what is his will soon have nothing to defend. and in this case, what we are talking about defending our principles -- are principles. freedom and human rights. and if we, the united states of america, are not prepared to defend freedom and human rights, we will no longer have them

someday. that is a fact. and, so, i am 100% in support of you. i understand my fellow americans who are calling. i know it is a struggle. putting dinner on the table. filling the gas tank. i know it is a struggle, but for now, i've got that covered, congressman. i will take care of me, you defend those principles. guest: well, that is very generous. i couldn't agree more. and i will also say this. look, i never have a problem with people being concerned with this issue or that. that is normal. but every now and then, we need to take a step back. and my friend from edmund and i just went through the 20th anniversary of the oklahoma city bombing. we were the beneficiary of all the resources of a great and compassionate people were there. the governor who i worked for at

the type did a magnificent job. i democratic president, bill clinton, at the time did a wonderful job with that. i think in crisis, americans do stick together. and i think if our founders came back, they would be surprised, frankly, that we are much more democratic than they were. we are much more diverse than they were. you know, i look over the history of the united states in my lifetime, i am old enough to have seen the south segregated with the jim crow laws. i am not telling you it is wonderful now, but it is a whole lot better. the country is moving broadly in the right direction. the people who fought in this overwrites movements didn't just fight for african-americans, a thought for all people. so, every now and then, let's just recognize the united states is still a pretty good place and bradley tries to do the right thing. its people are amazingly

generous and compassionate. i have sat on the fence appropriations subcommittees, my brother is a vietnam era veteran, i never served, but i admire their service, and there are plenty of people that are willing to do that to this day. to literally sacrifice themselves and put themselves at risk. so again, the united states is still the end the of the world and every now and then it is ok to be critical. that is how we get better. but let's recognize that this place works pretty well and that despite all our divisions and all our diversity, we come together when it counts. host: we have about a minute left in the segment. we are bringing on congressman becerra on next to talk about the transpacific partnership and the negotiations over fast-track authority. i want to get your thoughts on that. should the president receive fast-track authority? guest: i think you should. obviously, he will get a lot of republican support on this.

we think he is right. we think it is pretty possible to negotiate a trade deal with 535 negotiators. you have to empower the president to do it. congress could vote up-and-down -- up or down on it, but it is a massive thing. i think the president is right. it will create jobs in america. free trade helps bind people together. congress has the final say on the deal. if he succeeds in getting it, but will only happen with bipartisan cooperation. i think most republicans are in favor. it is a tougher vote for democrats, politically, so it will divide them. but you actually see republican congress and democrat president working together here. and members on both sides of the aisle. it tells me the place is working a little bit better than most people think. host: and we will be talking about that in our last 40

minutes or so on the "washington journal" today. congressman, always appreciate your time. guest: thank you. host: and we will be right back. >> here are some of our featured programs or this weekend on the c-span networks. saturday evening on c-span, the white house annual correspondence dinner -- correspondents' dinner. and sunday night at 8:00 p.m. on c-span's "q&a," under time in prison for not revealing the source of her report before and during the iraq invasion. saturday morning at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2, "booktv" is

alive for the annapolis book festival. authors include former attorney general alberto gonzales on immigration, answer a on world war ii and the holocaust. and sunday night at 10:30 coinciding with the release of c-span's new book, "first ladies." historians, along with authors explore the lives of our first ladies. and on "american history tv" at c-span3, saturday night at 8:00 eastern, lectures in history. on some of the issues debated during the constitutional convention of 1787. and sunday afternoon at 4:30, 40 years after the fall of saigon, south vietnamese veterans talk about their war experiences. get our complete schedule at c-span.org. >> she was considered modern for her time.

called assist president by her detractors -- mrs. president by her detractors. as one of the most prolific writers of any first lady, she provides a unique window into colonial america. abigail adams. sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's original series, first ladies. from the washington to michelle obama, sundays at 8:00 p.m. eastern on "american history tv" on c-span3. and c-span's new book is now available. "first ladies." on the lives of 45 iconic american women creating an illuminating, entertaining, and inspiring read. it is available as a hardcover or in e-book through your favorite bookstore or online bookseller.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: and we are joined now by california congressman, xavier becerra. congressman, you are joining us during a week in which the issue of the transpacific trade deal and the authorities the president has to negotiate the president has to negotiate that deal has reshuffled some of the usual alliances here in washington. first, where you stand on a transpacific partnership? guest: well, we haven't seen yet the agreement for the tpp. what we do have before us this week is what we call the trade promotion authority legislation that would give the president the ability to present a deal on a trade deal to congress and fast-track it, which means have an up or down vote, versus congress' usual process of having amendments, make changes. if that passes, tpa passes, give the president the opportunity to

present the tpp and have a straight up or down vote. from what we are hearing about the tpp, there are a number of disturbing aspects. like all these things, the devil's in the details. it is something a lot of us want to make sure we set the ground rules the right way so if you want to give the president fast-track authority, it is so he can do things the right way. host: if you want to get into some of those thanks, the white house noting it opens up 793 million consumers to u.s. products. an additional $123.5 billion a year in u.s. exports. what concerns you? guest: first, i would for that in say most countries want access to our consumers because our consumers have more money than most other consumers around the world. we may have access to 700 more million consumers, or whatever

the numbers are, but how many can buy the things we produce? that is the real question. the benefits of that bargain will they come to us as much as they would go to others? and the history on trade deals, and i have been here for 22 plus years since nafta, the history is mixed. there is some good things and there are some bad things. tpp, for example, is a deal where i think we should finally tackle what i believe is the most pervasive aspect of trade we haven't dealt with. and that is the fact that while we try to call -- tell countries, picture your companies are treating when you do business with us, it is hard to believe that those countries are going to make those companies in those countries follow those rules when the country itself isn't following the rules. a lot of countries today aren't following the rules. they are cheating by making the value of their currency seem less than what it really is. why? because that makes the product that they produce in that

country seem cheaper elsewhere in the world. because when you buy to using their currency, it is cheap. that makes it very difficult for us to sell american products because the american dollar is worth more. estimates are upwards of 5 million americans have lost their jobs as a result of currency manipulation. countries like china, japan, and others in the past. you are telling those countries in the -- those companies, you can cheat because we are allowing those countries to cheat. host: congressman tom cole was just on. he said he expects the president to get a lot of support for the fast-track. you have year finger on the pulse for the democratic caucus. how much support will the president get from the caucus? guest: he could get a lot of support if it were a tpa and a tpp. that addressed several of these

concerns. if these bills don't address these concerns, then i think he will have a tough time getting support. host: speaker john boehner with a tweet about the fast-track authority, tba. fax far from -- facts far from an executive power grab, tba -- tpa actually enhances congress' voice in it, you. we are joined by congressman becerra of california. for about the next half hour or so, he is taking your questions on this topic and others. start with howard, calling in from california. howard, good morning. caller: good morning. first of all, let me say i think -- i take issue with the callers who put you on the hook and ladder today. you are doing a fine job.

as a matter of fact, i have been watching c-span for a long time and i think you have changed policy to the better when you are letting them speak even if they don't know what they what they are talking about that. host: appreciate that. any thoughts on the tpp? caller: -- [indiscernible] i got into the conversation that you two are having, and you are talking about the issue congressman auxerre -- congressman becerra, with currency manipulation. with china, of course that they guy in the battle, but how can japan -- explain that to me.

the companies are looking for a better way of exporting, just like the u.s. it is more difficult to export your products if the dollar is high. how can the japanese -- and, by the way, the u.s. did not manipulate it. everyone from who knows where europe and asia, came into the united states because we have the better economy. host: congressman becerra. guest: that is a great question, john. how do you manipulate a currency? there are many ways and japan has done this. in one case, you go out and buy someone else's currency. so japan will use its currency to purchase in the international market american dollars. all of a sudden, american dollars are really attractive because someone is buying them up. you want to buy them before some details does because the value of that dollar rises, it becomes

more precious, more in demand. if it is more in demand, then the japanese currency becomes less and demand because it is accessible, it is out there there is a whole bunch of japanese currency of their in the market. so its value becomes less. and if you have large reserves the way china does, the way japan does, you can use those reserves to purchase dollars or purchase whatever currency they want to make that currency look more valuable, which makes their own currency look less valuable. so a japanese car manufactured in japan, when you try to buy it with the yen, the japanese currency it looks less expensive because they yen or that japanese -- the yen or that japanese currency is held at a lower value because they have made it artificially lower by flooding the market with their currency. then you sell all those goods

because your products look cheaper, lo and behold, you've got more industry. you've got more production. you've got more jobs. the countries at a disadvantage lose jobs, lose production. host: it is the yen. on this issue, other lessons to be learned from nafta? you or someone who supported nafta in your early years in congress. guest: i did. i have gone through nafta through the central american trade deal, through the deal with peru, colombia, korea, panama. we have done a number of deals and what you find is, at the end of the day john, it is all about making sure there are credible rules and you can enforce the rules. because if you can't do that, you and i may want to barter -- i like your suit, you like my tie. ok, what is the fair deal there?

if all of a sudden you can make your suit look less expensive to me because you manipulate the currency we used to do this stuff, then you have an advantage over me that is not real. it is artificial. so i have learned, you have to have credible rules and have to be able to enforce those rules. if you're not willing to enforce a rule country by country on how a country uses its currency, you cannot expect the country to then ask its companies to follow the rules so they don't undercut our american businesses and jobs. the end result is outsourcing of american jobs to other countries. host: kansas city is next. the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning, and i would like to thank the congressman for all his hard work. my question is, going forward in 2016, what is the landscape for democrats as far as a lot of issues, especially minorities, body cameras? can we get something like that

passed? also, body cameras were police officers, or law enforcement. and i would just operate there and let you take that question. guest: thanks for your call. i would tell you that i'm optimistic that 2016 will give us an opportunity to move forward in ways that help people feel secure, that they have their own privacy, and their own protection. taking care of by our authorities and not harmed by our authorities. so the thing that the federal government can do most his work with the states. because remember, the federal government is not supposed to make laws on every aspect of our lives. that is why have the states. but what he can -- what we can do is help. make sure that law-enforcement agencies that are trying to move forward with body cameras for other officers on the street have the resources to do so because we believe it is an important activity as well.

we don't govern local, city police departments, but what we can do is give them the incentives to quickly manage up -- man up or have the resources to get those body cameras in place or do those things that best picture they are doing proper -- proper enforcement of the laws and providing the proper security for all of our residents, including folks of color who often believe that life was meant is not there to protect them. host: jack is on her life for independence. jack, good morning. caller: good morning. and thank you for letting me on. i am confused about tpp tpa and nafta, in this congressman's opinion, didn't nafta hurt us as a country? and want -- won't the outcome be the same for tpp? guest: i would say, on the

whole, i am disappointed with what nafta brought here we were told it would help us create 200,000 jobs. it came nowhere near close. we have seen a lot of small businesses, american workers manufacturing industry leave and go right over the border and. i have relatives who are from mexico -- that it would help lift them into the middle class and still have a lot of low skill low-wage work going on in mexico. there has certainly been a lot more commas -- commerce, no doubt. but the result of that commerce, it has not gone down to all the folks who thought it would. host: is it a vote that you regret? guest: i do. i wish i would have demanded more credible rules and more ability to enforce. we would hold, those who want to fight for american jobs that we would have agreement, a side

agreement that would protect the rights for workers. we were told that side agreement is in the deal itself. i wanted to believe that. i believed the president. it never did that. you have to have credible rules and have to be able to enforce. we have actions against countries right now that a not horsing -- and forcing their -- enforcing their end of the bargain right now. american companies and american workers are the losers. so you have to be able to have credible rules that are in forceful. host: and their caller wants you to run through the differences between tpa and tpp. guest: tpa is the acronym for the trade promotion authority. a bill that would give the president a fast-track authority to avoid having to go through the regular congressional process of hearings and amendments and different types of votes. and fast-track is just one vote, up or down. host: and tbs been approved

before. guest: tpas have been approved before so that when you bring up a trade deal, like nafta, like the central american free trade agreement, you can bring those up with justin up or down vote. tpp would be the trade deal in itself. tpa is the process. host: edward in california, the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. first, i would like to say thank you to congressman becerra for the service you do in the congress. and my question to you is, infrastructure bill passed in the government. sir, i'm a union trades member, and it is extremely hard and has been externally hard for years to get a job. it's like there is no infrastructure work out there. and we need this infrastructure funding bills. not only would it put us trade

members back to work, congressman becerra, it would also put the people that support the construction trade back to work. people that provide the materials, the staffing, everything. this is a win-win situation to get an infrastructure bill passed and i would like to know, is there one on the books? and were try to push one through? thank you. host: congressman? guest: let me just say, as a former member of the labor union myself, local 185 in california i remember the days tried to help pay for my college and i used to work on road construction crews. you are absolute right. when you've got a roku out there or a building crew out there they are making -- road crew out there or a building crew out there, they are making money for their families. and at the same time, you are making it possible for the small restaurant around the corner to

sell a few extra lunches to those working on the site. so it is actually good when you are building, you are helping americans and you are building the middle class. so i agree with you, edward. out only say this. i can't tell you that i can give you a lot of congress that congress will get this done right when it comes to a service transportation bill, the kind of registration that we have done in the past on a bipartisan basis, to get our roads and our bridges rebuilt, our schools improved, our bridges retrofitted and our hospitals retrofitted in california -- in places like california or have earthquakes. we should be doing that. it not only creates jobs, but it is what our kids in need. if you have a decrepit railroad system, if you have ports that can handle the largest container ships that are coming in, then you are not going to be competitive. so i want to put you to work.

i want to make sure you are working overtime. i remember, overtime pay is pretty good. saturday and sunday pay isn't bad, either. if you are working, then we are building the middle class. host: not sure if edward is one of your constituents, but if you ran for senate in one, he would be one of your constituents. where are you on the seat that will open up? guest: i have told folks that i will give it a various -- very serious thought. i will likely make a decision in the next month or two. the seventh largest economy in the world, one state california. we have to make sure we are doing the right thing because our state constantly contributes way more to the federal treasury than it ever gets back. we are the hub of innovation and ideas. so it is a really important job and within the next month or two i suspect i will be making a decision about whether or not a from a hat in the ring to become the next senator. host: we will keep an eye out

for that. the line for republicans. kayla, good morning. caller: good morning, congressman. good morning, c-span. i completely understand the concern about unfair practices in countries with which we hope to have trade deals. but i get concerned about the lens through which our representatives view trade deals when i hear them use phrases like our companies, our industries our dollars. we, as a nation, do not collectively own companies. only individuals own companies. the only thing that our government should be concerned with is increasing the rights of individuals. there is no such thing as some sort of collective right. so my ability to trade with people abroad should be with what you are concerned with, not some imagined group. anyway, that is my concern. that it is weird through some

sort of lens of collective rights, rather than individual rights. i will take my response on the air. host: caleb in washington dc. guest: caleb, i understand what you are saying. i can't say i fully agree with it. i think the u.s. constitution granted not just individual rights, i think it also granted collective rights. i think it gives us a collective responsibility. so, i agree with your point that we don't own as a collective as a nation, a company. individuals on that company. but individuals in those companies, individuals who are working, who live around our country are asking us to take action as legislators to pass laws to hopefully benefit the collective, not just individuals. so in this case, the trade

deal, we are trying to make a decision on whether or not changing the rules under which we operate and do trade bartering, buying, and purchasing, and selling, that we what to do a particular rule passive particular role that will determine -- pass a particular rule that will determine how we engage in that collective. so i understand the distinction. i think the use of the word our is still appropriate. host: and always appreciate feedback on the "washington journal." you can also e-mail us. john is up next. lancaster, pennsylvania. the line for independents. john, good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. here is my question. i am 66 years old. i have seen, you know, these corporations starting to outsource work since the 1970's. then you head back to, -- then

you had nafta the korean free-trade agreement, and there is one commonality in all of these trade agreements. we are in massive trade deficits. ok, that acquits to loss of jobs. ok, plus they get a tax break to move their capital out of the country. i am against fast-track. i think it is anti-democratic. it is a way for congress to hide. how can you enforce a standard of anything? you know, you see a dog that got severely sick because we to gluten was contaminated -- wheat gluten was contaminated in the dog food. nobody has a job unless there is capital. you don't tax the capital going out, you only taxes coming in. tell me how that makes sense? both parties are guilty of this

stuff. so i am no democrat or republican. i am just saying you guys have to work smarter, ok? i am sorry if i'm a little bit upset, but i am. thank you. guest: john, i think what john is saying is a reflection of what i think probably the majority of americans are saying. they have an apprehension about these trade deals. i don't blame them. as i said, i did put for nafta. i regret now seeing how it has played out. i cannot support this trade promotion authority bill that is going to be before the committee today because of the concerns that john is expressing. john may not be here in d.c. to get to see how we operate and how we go through the process of deciding how to vote, but he certainly does live the results of what we do. and my concern here is that if john feels that there is something going on back home in pennsylvania, and i hear from my folks in california the same

thing, then the has to be some truth to part of it. and what i believe we have to do is make it so that john and everybody else's country says trade, yeah, we have to do it because look at the jobs that were crated back:. i can see that capital coming in etc. trade has been very mixed. there has been good things about opening up trade, of being able to go into other markets and sell our products to others. but too often, it has been the office it -- the opposite. that we allow others to dump their products here at the expense of american jobs and products. of american -- american representatives in congress are going to change the rules of trade, we should do it to benefit americans first. if you can't do that, if you can't tell americans with a straight face that you're going to do that, then you can't be changing the rules. host: some comments from other members of congress on tpp. here is senator elizabeth warren

of massachusetts, the obama administration says i am wrong. we shouldn't wear about the tpp. so why can't the american people read the deal? to have concerns about what is going on behind closed doors? guest: yes. not so much because i think our representatives in the administration are trying to do the wrong thing. it is more because congress has a right to see this stuff. at the end of the day, we are the ones in congress have to approve a deal. and to be handed just a deal and if you use a fast-track authority, a deal where you can only vote up and down and cap make any changes, you have to have far more transparency consultation with congress if you expect to have a deal that you are dust expecting us to vote up or down on. host: so that puts toomey coax in the kitchen as the deal is being made? guest: yeah, there are too many devils in the details.

i have to be able to go back on and say, i knew what our signing and i felt good about it. i do want to have regret the way i have now with nafta back in the early 1990's. and i don't believe anybody in american public should believe we are doing this without full knowledge of what our representatives understand of these deals. so, at the end of the day, i think there is a reason for more transparency. this is why the trade -- is not a good idea. host: michigan, republicans. good morning, marty. caller: yes, sir. thank you for taking my call. and thank you, congressman. i hope i get time to talk. i'm kind of wanted to ask two questions -- i kind of wanted to ask two questions. i have a 13-year-old daughter. and these are american issues. i get really worried when we are in a country that is supposed to

be recovered yet we are in 18 -- $18 trillion in national debt, but the scary one is 120 join dollars of unfunded debt and both parties seem to neglect that. that is almost more than the gdp of many, many, many nations. you know, if you guys would ask the address and somehow work -- our last two presidents brought this country to $14 trillion in debt. they have added $14 trillion of the $18 trillion. what i also want to ask is how you guys get the job numbers because we say there are 12 million jobs being created, but if you look at first time unemployment filers, it is double that. for every job that is created we are losing at least two or three jobs. i am not here to complain to you, sir. i have here -- m here to ask you

to think about our children's futures. guest: thank you, marty. tell your 13-year-old to continue studying. parents that care about her, she will probably have a great opportunity for college and a great teacher. i have three daughters myself. my youngest is 17. i am hoping the third will get into the college that she chooses. and i look for to their future. but you are right, we have to make sure that what we are doing leaves them with a better opportunity than what we had. with regards to the issue of the national debt, i hope you will look at this holistically. your numbers i think are inflated in terms of the outermost statistic that you talked about. over $100 trillion. you are talking about a projection that is completely based on numbers that we will never know over the next decade.

but we do know this. we do have deficits that you mentioned that have led to a debt of about $18 trillion that we oh. but you have to put that that in perspective. it is not good, but at the same time, when you talk about that, you have to talk about what your assets are as well because you don't just oh -- owe, you have assets. if you totaled up the value of america it is way, way more than what our debt is. that doesn't mean that it is good that we have debt, but we are not in the circumstance where we are a poor country. we are a country that has to get it fiscal house in order. so i agree with you there. but let me tell you, when you're doing tax cuts -- last week, we did a bill on the floor of the house that gives the wealthiest 1/10 of 1% of americans a tax

break of $278 billion. that means that you and i will never get that tax break. 99.9% of americans will never get that tax break. and it will cost $278 billion. that is the kind of thing has to stop. this lunacy that you can you tax breaks to special interest and still not run up big deficits. so i hope we get control of the investments that we need, of cures to cancer and diabetes that we invest in our kids, like your daughter, and good schools. and we recognize that when we do a tax break for folks, let's do it. but not just for the 1/10 of the wealthiest 1%. i forgot the second issue? host: marty was not confident in the jobs numbers. guest: there is a number that is not often used, and that is the number of folks who have given up looking. and that number is bigger than it typically has been.

so you are right, if talk about all the americans that have not found work, including those who are looking for work, it is bigger than what we have seen. but there is no denying that over the last five years, we have seen some of them million jobs created. and that is good. host: leesa brown on twitter has a question for you. what are you doing about the extreme water shortage in california where i live? guest: well, i personally and making sure that in the activities i do, the properties i own, we are trying to make sure that we are not wasting water. we are going to start to see in california where a lot of us who own homes will have to go towards different types of landscaping so we don't have to use as much water. we will have to reduce our consumption in simple ways. when you have a restaurant, you are no longer serving water whether or not the patron wants the water. you serve water only when it is requested to at the same time, -- is requested and at the same

time, we have to ask our agriculture businesses to change the ways they operate. at the same time, the agriculture community has a fixed system in place. i can easily tell my daughter stop running the water while you are brushing the teeth. you can't tell the farmer who grows a particular crop, planted different crop. it took you five years to build up those trees that give you all the to or whatever else, you can't just say, tomorrow i am going to change. so we have to recognize that we all have something to do, but it is going to be on different levels. we have to do it is a don't think will ever return to the days where he had more accessible water. and we can't build some pipeline coming from washington state to bring down water to california. host: bill is in indiana on our line for democrats peel -- democrats.

bill, you are on with congressman becerra. caller: yes, my question is -- this country that goes out of the united states with their product and then they ship it back in here, should we have a tax on that? on that product? i believe so. i wonder what his answer would be. thank you. guest: so, bill has pointed to something that is really pernicious, really ugly in trade. and that his wife have cap good rules that you can enforce -- that is why you have to have good rules that you can enforce. some companies that have been in america will leave america and go to some these countries that have lower protection for workers, lower safety laws and so forth. so the cost of doing business is less. they will manufacture products. if that country reaches a trade deal with the u.s., and knock us to ship the product into the u.s. for a really good deal.

well, it is going to compete are american businesses that follow safety rules, that pay their workers a decent wage. so is it fair to have a company in the u.s. -- leave the u.s., go to a haven for those types of protections against safety rules and good wages, and then have them be able to ship back that product into the u.s. at the expense of american workers and american companies? i think bill is pointing out those are the kinds of things you have to watch out for and that is why you have to have trade deals that have strong credible rules and you can enforce them. after 22 years, i have my doubts. host: in new york, our line for republicans. as we wait for the house to come in at 9:00 this morning. go ahead. caller: yes, thank you. good morning, congressman. guest: how are you? caller: fine, thank you. you speak about jobs and employment.

i have been in the food industry for about 30 years. it has been so hard to find a job because of illegal immigration, they have taken up most of the jobs. and also, on more than one occasion and i went for interviews, i was asked if i spoke spanish. and it is so disheartening that i feel the immigration laws aren't being enforced. and it leaves the american citizens out in the cold. guest: let me first tell you, i hope you don't give up. you sound like someone who tries really hard, and i think in the future, i hope when you call back to c-span, you will be able to talk about how you are back at work, making things happen for you and your family. i will say this, it is time to fix a broken immigration system. there is no way you can expend a system that can, a love and million people live in this country and work when they don't have the papers, the rights to be here. but at the same time, we are

obviously doing something that is attracting them. and that is you have employers who are willing to offer these folks a job. and so, my approach is not to attack the guy who wants to work, like you want to work. my approach is to say there is a lot to say that you can't hire someone who doesn't have papers. we don't go after those folks were violating the law, which means that the worker coming into this country without papers is violating the law as well as we have to stop that. we have to make it so that if you come into this country, you come in at the right way. we had a bill last year that could have helped us do that, but we couldn't get our republican colleagues to allow a vote on that bill. i still believe we have majorities in the house and senate that would like to move in a direction of finally fixing a broken immigration system with some commonsense changes. but it is tough. and i will tell you this. i don't think it is just bashing those work hard, including those

immigrants i think it is making sure that if you come into this country as an immigrant, you can prove that you are working hard, you are going to pay taxes the way you do, and you also will become an american citizen host: i want to thank the congressman for joining us. we are going to take our viewers live to the house floor with a house is about to gavel in for the day. that confirmation vote on loretta lynch could take place as early as 2:00 p.m. this afternoon. even watch all of the action on that confirmation -- you can watch all the action on the confirmation on c-span 2. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly pro