opposition to this amendment and i'm actually quite surprised that we find ourselves here tonight attempting to overturn the national park service recent policy changes to stop allowing the confederate flag to be displayed or sold in national parks. mr. chairman, just yesterday this house passed an amendment -- passed amendment after amendment supporting the removal of the symbol of racism from our national parks, which are visited every day by americans and foreign visitors of every race. we have read about the divisive tactics happening in the south carolina state house as they debate the removal of the confederate flag. after the murder of nine black parishioners. i never thought that the u.s. house of representatives would join those who would want to see this flag flown by passing an amendment to ensure the continuing flying of the

confederate flag. i strongly urge every member to stand with the citizens of all races and to remove this symbol of hatred from our national park service. and with that i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. calvert: i continue to reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from minnesota is recognized. ms. mccollum: mr. chair i have the right to close. so i reserve my time until i close. the chair: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. the gentleman from california wish to reserve? mr. calvert: i urge adoption of the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from minnesota is recognized. ms. mccollum: i want to restate on june 25 what the national park service director when he

requested that confederate flag sales be removed from the national park book stores and gift shops, he also followed a decision by several large national retailers, wal-mart amazon and sears, to stop selling items with confederate flags on them. and i agreed with these decisions and i commend those for their prompt action. while in certain and very limited circumstances it might be appropriate in a national park to display the image of the confederate flag in a historical content, and i say that as a social studies teacher, the display or sale of confederate flags is inappropriate and divisive and i strongly oppose this amendment, which is an attempt to negate amendments which were approved yesterday without any opposition to limit the displaying of the confederate flag. and so we should make sure that we uphold what this house stood for yesterday.

which is to say no to racism, which is to say no to hate speech. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. ms. mccollum: mr. chair. i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18 further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from california will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentlelady from minnesota wish to be recognized? ms. mccollum: mr. chair, i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. ms. mccollum: as we prepare to finish consideration of h.r.

2822, i want to take this opportunity to congratulate my subcommittee chairman, ken calvert, from getting this bill to this point. it has not been an easy process. as we just realized a few moments ago. we've had to consider nearly twice as many amendments as any other appropriations bill taken up in the house this year. and while i have not agreed with a considerable number of the amendments that have been made to the bill, i do appreciate the chairman. and that we have been able to disagree when necessary without being disagreeble. my working relationship with chairman calvert has been first-rate. i appreciate the hard work and effort he's put into the bill and let me also express my sincere thanks to the committee staff on both sides of the aisle, as well as the personal staff in both of our respective offices for their work on the bill. they put in long hours to smooth away for consideration of this bill and i appreciate their efforts.

just a minute, please. once again i want to say that we've had a good working relationship, mr. chairman, but i cannot hide my surprise and my outrage that we find ourselves here tonight attempting to overturn the national park service's recent policy change to stop allowing the confederate flag to be displayed or sold at our national parks. with that i would yield to the chairman. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. calvert: i want to say that i enjode and continue to enjoy -- enjoyed and continue to enjoy working with the gentlelady as we move this process forward and i appreciate your courtesy and kindness. we'll continue to work this process as we move >> overnight there were a number of stories, including the house

once a do over on the confederate flag. john boehner held a news briefing calling for an adult debate over the display of the confederate flag. he said he would create an informal bipartisan group to review all matters related to the display of the confederate memorabilia likely to include those in the u.s. capitol. >> good morning everyone. here in the house we continue to get things done for the

american people. the first entitlement reform since the 1990's, new tools to fight human trafficking, new resources to combat veteran suicides. we sent to the president a bill that gets our veterans a permanent id card to prove their service. we pass reforms to the health force for a good educational matter where they are from. our focus continues to be on the people's priorities. iran is not serious about abandoning its weapons program. when will his negotiators stand strong? we cannot accept a deal that hands a ron -- iran to build a

bomb almost immediately. iran is a global menace, the world's largest state sponsor of terror and it is a pipe dream to think that the regime will be a responsible partner when it comes to iraq, yemen,. it is time for the administration to come back to earth. obama made a statement at the pentagon. he announced no new changes in our fight against isis. nothing is going to change, i don't know how we're going to expect to win. president obama i think has to lay out a broad overarching strategy to defeat and destroy these savage terrorists. i've outlined on a number of occasions what in my view an overarching strategy should look like. we should give our commanders on the ground more flexibility. need to combat isil's use of social media, and we need to

engage, not ignore, our long-standing allies. we only have one commander in chief at a time. however, it's his responsibility to lead this fight against isil. lastly, on the issue of benghazi and the work of the select committee, secretary clinton said, and i'll quote, it is the fact that we have released all of the emails that any government relation -- that have any government relationship whatsoever. that's just isn't true. he said, -- she said, sidney blumenthal sent me unsolicited emails. that's not true either. and secretary clinton said, and i'll quote, there's no subpoena regarding her email. that isn't true either. all these facts from uncovered by the benghazi select committee and they were uncovered despite the efforts of secretary clinton and the state department to

delay, derail and stop this fact-finding investigation. as chairman gowdy said this week, secretary clinton had a statutory duty to preserve these records from her time in office. she had a legal duty to cooperate and tell the truth with congressional investigators requesting her records, going back to 2012. so four americans lost their lives in this terrorist attack. the american people deserve the truth about what really happened. secretary clinton, the state department are prolonging this investigation. they need to stop dragging this out. they need to start cooperating and step up document production so we can get all the facts. frankly, that's not too much to ask. reporter: how is an amendment to preserve the confederate flag -- the speaker: what our members tried to address the concerns

yesterday in a way that was consistent with how the obama administration has handled this issue. i frankly supported the goal of trying to work with all the parties to address their concerns but, listen, we all witnessed the people of charleston and the people of south carolina come together in a respectful way to deal with frankly what was a very horrific crime and a difficult issue with the confederate flag. i actually think it's time for some adults here in the congress to actually sit down and have a conversation about how to address this issue. i do not want this to become some political football. it should not. and so i would expect you'll see some conversations in the coming days. reporter: do you think they should be at federal cemeteries, confederate flags? the speaker: no. reporter: jared huffman and democrats who did it put an amendment in the appropriations

bill, what do you mean it has become a political football? as you know southern members approached leadership saying they'll vote against the interior bill with this amendment. what do you mean political football? it was regular order, adopted by voice vote. it was reversed. how is it political football? the speaker: i think when you look at several weeks ago there was a privileged resolution dropped and then there were these amendments, i want members on both sides of the aisle to sit down, let's have a conversation about how to address what frankly has become a thorny issue. reporter: can you tell us what does that conversation entail? is this some sort of special committee, commission? is it the house and senate? the speaker: i have some ideas. when i firm them up in my head i'll let you know. reporter: mr. speaker, i'm a little unclear what you're suggesting goes on in talks. you have been persistently

suspect of what's going on here, but yet if the united states pulls out -- there is no agreement, a lot of people say that is a path to war and is a far worse alternative. are you thinking that is the route we go, we don't have a agreement, then it's military action against iran because we don't have a framework? the speaker: no, i disagree with that entire notion. the fact is that the administration has backed away from their own guidelines that they set up going into this. what they were trying to accomplish. they backed away from every one of them. and i don't -- i'm not trying to stop any deal here. what i'm trying to do is stop a bad deal because a bad deal is going to frankly put in the hands of the iranians a nuclear weapon. i'm opposed to it. reporter: when you say you disagree with the notion here, are you -- what is it the alternative, why wouldn't there be military action?

why wouldn't iran build a nuclear weapon and the united states see -- increased terrorist threats here? the speaker: i think the sanctions put in place ought to go back in place. and make it clear to iran that the world community is not going to accept their development of a nuclear weapon. reporter: the bill has been pulled from the house floor, can you explain your thinking why you did that and what is the -- then the debate on the -- the speaker: i just told you. i believe it's time for some members to sit down and have cafferings about how to deal with this issue in a responsible way. because i believe that members on both sides of the aisle want to deal with it in a responsible way.

reporter: speaking on another issue that's a political football. you said for some time that your party needs to fix the broken immigration system. members of your party have been denouncing the comments of donald trump who is running for president saying that all mexicans were rapists. as the leader of your party, had to call on yesterday and ask the opponent down, what's your message to donald trump and are you concerned about the impact that debate is having on your party? the speaker: i disagree with mr. trump's comments. and frankly i think when you look at the presidential candidates, they've all pretty well made their position clear. this has become the biggest political football i've seen in my congressional career. the issue of illegal immigration and what to do with it. as i said last week, it's not going to get resolved by congress sticking their heads in the sand. and if we want to resolve issues, like we see developed in san francisco and elsewhere, we need to get serious about enforcing the laws we have. we all like the laws we have

then we need -- if we don't like the laws we have, then we neat to sit down and get it resolved. i'd rather have it resolved sooner rather than later. reporter: will they work on immigration legislation later this year? the speaker: i would hope so. reporter: like what? the speaker: i would hope so. reporter: the conversation you had about the flag, does that extend to any resolution? the committees they've been sent to have no immediate plans to hold any hearings. the speaker: i just think that we ought to address this in a fairly broadway. i got a pretty good idea the kind of members who ought to be part of that conversation. reporter: but mr. speaker, are you saying that -- will there be a vote on the calvert amendment or is that what you're going to discuss? the speaker: no, that bill's going to -- that bill will sit until we can come to some resolution on this. thanks, everybody. \[captions copyright national

cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] in the next up in the day was nancy pelosi offering arose illusion that would have forced mississippi state flag which includes the confederate flag to be removed from the house side of the capital. after she offer the resolution house majority leader kevin mccarthy moved to refer the measure to the house of administration committee for further review. the house voted along party lines to refer representative pelosi's resolution to the committee, punting the issue. the national journey rights in motion on house floor over state flags containing the confederate battle flag. we will watch what happened now.

a question of the privileges of the house and i send to the desk a privileged resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: raising a question of privileges of the house. whereas at 4:00 p.m. today, july 9, the governor of south carolina will sign legislation to remove the display of the confederate battle flag. whereas on december 20, 1860, south carolina became the first state to secede from the union. whereas on january 9, 1861, mississippi seceded from the union stating in its declaration of immediate causes that our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery, the greatest material interest of the world. whereas on february 9 1861, the confederate states of america was formed in a group of 11 states as supported sovereign nation with jefferson davis of mississippi as its president. whereas on march 11 1861, the

confederate states of america adopted its own constitution. whereas on april 12, 1861, the confederate states of america fired shots upon fort sumter in -- sum ter in charleston, south carolina effectively beginning the civil war. whereas the united states did not recognize the confederate states of america as a sovereign nation but rather as a rebel insurrection and took to military battle to bring the rogue states back into the union. whereas on april 9 1865, general robert e. lee surrendered to general ulysses s. grant at appomattox courthouse in virginia, effectively ending the civil war and preserving the union. . the confederate states of america used the jack. whereas since the end of the civil war, the navy jack, confederate battle flag has been

appropriated by groups of symbols of hate terror and intolerance and supportive of the institution of slavery. whereas groups such as white supremacist groups frighten, terrorize and call harms to groups of people with they have hateful intent, including african-americans and hispanic and jewish americans. along with mississippi house speaker and other state leaders have spoken out and advocated for the removal of the confederacy on mississippi state flag. whereas many members of congress, including john boehner support the removal of the confederate flag from the grounds of the south carolina's

capitol. speaker released a statement saying i commend the governor and other south carolina leaders in their effort to remove the confederate flags. in his second inaugural address the month before his assassination, president lincoln ended his speech with these pa powerful words which are meaningful today as when they were spoken on the east front of the capitol on march 4, 1865. with malice toward none with charity for all, with firmness in the right as god gives us, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a lasting peace with all nations. whereas the house of representatives has several state flags with imagery of the confederacy throughout the main

structures and house office buildings, whereas it is a fact that symbols of the confederacy insult many members of the general public. whereas congress has never recognized the symbols of sovereign nations within whom it has gone to war, whereas continuing to display symbol of hatred oppression that nearly tore our union apart that is known to have been through many groups would damage the reputation of this august body, institution and offend the very dignity of the house of representatives. and whereas impairment of the dignity of the house and its members constitutes a violation of rule 11 of the rules of the house of representatives of the 114th congress, now therefore be it resolved that the speaker of

the house of representatives shall remove any state flag containing any portion of the confederate battle flag other than a flag displayed by a member of the house from any area within the house wing of the whol and donate any such flag to the library of congress. the speaker pro tempore: the resolution presents a question of privilege. the gentleman from california. >> i have a motion at the desk. the clerk: mr. mccarthy of california moves that the resolution be referred to the committee on house administration. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. gentleman is recognized for one hour. mr. mccarthy: this raises an

important question and the house would be best served by committee action. i'm moving to refer it to house administration. i yield back and move the previous question on the motion. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the ayes have it. the previous question is ordered. ms. pelosi: mr. speaker, i ask for a recorded vote. mr. speaker i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady asking for a vote on ordering the previous question. ms. pelosi: -- refer to committee. the speaker pro tempore: the question has not put that

question. ms. pelosi: may i have a parliamentary inquiry? mr. speaker, parliamentary inquiry. i'll wait until the -- recorded vote. the speaker pro te what curt clawson was the only republican to side with democrats on the confederate flag. all of this and response to the amendment offered by ken calvert that would have permitted national cemeteries to continue their current policy of allowing cemeteries to commemorate

confederate memorial day to decorate the graves of civil war veterans with confederate flags. a statement released about the amendment saying, the amendment was brought to me by leadership at the request of some southern members of the gop caucus. i regret not conferring with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. a number of democrats came to the floor to talk about the confederate flag amendment in talking points memo. while railing against e-house amendment to preserve the display of the confederate battle flag representative james clyburn of south carolina chose to use an anecdote about general robert e lee to convince conservatives to stand down. here are his remarks along with those of representative john lewis of georgia. n: thyou, mr. speake mr. wou le first of a thank thpe is house anhe other

members whcameo charleston st mono hp us w ceremonie for thesenar. i'd also like to thank ly my cles senorscott, senatr ndy grahamongn saor forng with us as too wh the governor o south colin andaed remgheonfedate ba fl from the ground of the tate house.

is afternoonat 4:00, aa resultf ay definitive vote ely t morning 94-20,e vern going t sign the billdomorrow mornngt 10:00the flag wil remov from the ate hous . i reret at'm not to be able to accepthe govnor's invitation and be th tafternn bec ound 4:00 this afteoon we're gg to be votinre his flr. underand there will arnd 25ot, and 24 othem i might feel a that bad, but one of tm i cannot affoo ssecthat one -- i

might feel that batissi, but o ofm i ot afford to ms cause at one, the calvert ameent, votesen thibody to joiwith south arolinaalabamand actities going on in misssippi to g rid of an official applicatio this fl condete battle ag. no i think it's important for uspoint out tha tss not the conrate f. thedacy hthree flags. is w ner one of the

th flag ia flag, the coederate battle ag of the army of orvirginia robert.ee's army and wh robert e. lee rrenderehe asked all of his followers to if yocall this flag stowy, put i your attics. heusd tburiedin his confedete uniform his family refused t allow anyone dressed in t confederatunortoend his funer why? becserobert ee said consered thislem to be symbol ofreason.

yealvert p uan amdment ate're ng t vo ohis aernoon to ask toallothis fg to sold d dispyed in our natial par iwas poud when the decision was may the nationark service. fort suter, natio park where civil war started off e cast ofrleon, soh liey cid to tke away all of tse symbols t the cal amendmenis no, takethem away. t themk. and we are going raty action to d so. i' calling onllm lleagues come his floor this aftrnoon

rememr that it is thi te in thatouth carolina, whe itllrted south carolina w t state that ve totesecessa to ratif14th andment to , aery, ry iortant amdment. full of due friend, mr. mcgovern, for yielding. mr. speaker, i must tell you, my heart is heavy. i'm saddened by what has happened here in america. i thought we had come much further, much further along. growing up in rural alabama attending school in nashville tennessee, now living in georgia i've seen the signs

that says white the clerk will designate. white waiting the clerk will designate waiting. during the 1960's, during the height of the civil rights movement, we brought those signs down. they're gone. the only place that we would see those signs today would be in the book, in a museum or on a video. if a descendent of jefferson davis say their flag is a symbol of hate, why can't we do it here? why can't we move to the 21st century? racism is a disease. we must free ourselves for the way of hate, the way of

violence, the way of division. we are not there yet. we have not yet created the beloved community where we respect the dignity and the worth of every human being. we need to bring down the flag. the scars and stains of racism are steered deeply and embedded in every corner of american society. i don't want to see our little children, whether they're black or white latina native americans, -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. lewis: these signs -- mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentleman an additional minute. mr. lewis: as a nation and as a people we can do better. we can lay down this heavy burden. it is too heavy to bear. hate is too heavy to burden to bear -- too heavy a burden to bear. we can't plant these seeds in the minds of our people.

when i was marching across that bridge in selma in 1965, i saw some of the law officers sheriff deputies wearing on their helmet the confederate flag. i don't want to go back and as a country we cannot go back. we must go forward and create a community that recognizes all of us as human beings, as citizens, one people, one nation. we all live in the same house >> a vote allowing confederate flags and national park service cemeteries would have put southern lawmakers in particular in a tough spot on the record on if they supported the flag by graves. the story quoting republican

representative jody hice of george's saying this morning he plans to support the amendment. the amendment that is coming to the floor simply codifies existing law that has been in place for five years that allows the states to recognize historical significance on dates of their choosing while at the same time recognizing sensitivities that many have with the flag. while some republicans spoke about the confederate flag issue it was mostly the house to make rest that spoke on the floor. in a news briefing about it. here is that briefing.

nancy pelosi: good afternoon. today we had action on the floor. i presented a privilege resolution that would have captured the action put forth two weeks ago. it was referred to the committee on house administration never to be heard from again. that is intolerable. i put forth mr. thompson's similar resolution and that was referred to the committee of house administration. it has to be doubt with expeditiously, we hope.

but we shall see. i had an inquiry to ask what is the status of the resolution of two weeks ago, they were not prepared. the chair said he could not tell us anything about that. here we are on the 147th anniversary of the 14th amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law here we are on the day when the state of south carolina by an act of legislature and the signature of the governor will be taking down the flag. the house of representatives republicans in the house voting down in the discussion of the battle flag and the capital of the united states. i couldn't be prouder of our

members. this is a matter of value, of principle, of who we are as americans. i want to acknowledge them and in doing so i want to yield to our distinguished assistant leader. and thank him for the inspiration he has been to our nation and the last few weeks. for this -- and the sympathies for the loss he has suffered in his state and his district and thank him for his leadership. mr. clyburn. >> thank you madam leader. today is an interesting day. we are celebrating the days after happened to of been the state that ratified the 14th amend met on this day bringing the number of states necessary

to be a part of our constitution on this day. the day the governor signed a piece of legislation taking that flag across the grounds of the state house. they remove it at 10:00 in the morning. the interesting thing about this is this is a picture of the statehouse in columbia, south carolina, and the confederate battle flag. the flag of the army of northern virginia. that is what that is. there are three versions of the confederate flag. this was never one of them. the proponents of this flag tried forever to have it adopted and given official status, the daughters of the confederacy rejected it.

when robert e lee surrendered at appomattox, he urged all of his followers to furl the flag. in one statement he said put it in your addicts. -- antics. he didn't want to be buried in his confederate uniform. he said this was a symbol and the uniform is a dress of treason. that is the history of this flag. why it is that we are having such a hard time today on the day that south carolina becomes the last state to take it off of the rounds, we have decided we are going to make it mandatory that our national parks this

play on their grounds. now, after the funeral, there was a long possession in procession to where he was to be laid to rest. on that route, through the towns , people came to the curbs stood on the side of the road, waving the united states flag. one flag. black, white, young, old. all waving, and pledge of allegiance to that one flag. our leader talks about our motto.

out of many, one. one flag. one nation. indivisible. with liberty and justice for all. one flag. one nation. with that, i would like to yield to my longtime friend. we have known each other for 45-50 years. one of the things we joke about is south carolina was the first to see mississippi -- south carolina was the first to secede, mississippi was not far behind. >> what you have seen over the last two weeks is an effort by members of the democratic caucus to put closure to an open wound that has been here for a long time. i live in mississippi.

i have lived my entire life. i've had to endure a lot of atrocities that african-americans have had to enter at the hands of officials who waive this flag. when the civil war started south carolina and mississippi had more african-americans living in its state than they had any other race. but they were all slaves. this war was fought over slavery. the symbol was a confederate battle flag. people still see this flag is a symbol that the war is not over that it is heritage and not

taped. you lost the war. it is time for you to join the rest of the country and be the united states of america. we should have a place for those things to be. over our capitals, and be representatives of the states that we live in is an insult because of what they stand for. racism, bigotry, all those things in a democracy have no place. our effort is to have the united states house of representatives provide the leadership necessary to begin the complete healing by removing those symbols of hatredand bigotry + that we can no longer afford to live with as a country.

that is where my resolution was offered. and all these other maneuvers to avoid making tough decisions can only delay the process. we have to get beyond this. we have to get republican leadership in this institution to let us take a vote, let us not make referrals. there is enough history, enough on the record as to what the symbols stand for that there is no reason to conduct any hearings to do that. i would like to introduce congressman jeffers of new york who was instrumental in helping us bring this issue to the forefront. also instrumental in getting our

interior appropriations canceled. [laughter] >> thank you leader pelosi and the distinguished gentleman from mississippi. earlier this week, i introduced collectively three amendments whose purpose was to prohibit the use of federal funds connected with the purchase sale, or display of the confederate battle flag on national grounds. house republicans were prepared to do the right thing and help to banish the symbol of racial hatred and depression. then the ghosts of the confederacy were invaded the republican congress. as a result, less than 24 hours

in a dramatic turnaround, in the dead of night house republicans reversed course. and set forth to legislatively legitimize the display and the fail of the confederate flag. they have made the decision to refer mr. thompson's resolution to a committee for a hearing. i am perplexed. the members of the republican congress who support the battle flag argue that this is about heritage and tradition. what exactly is the tradition the confederate battle flag is meant to represent? is it slavery?

race? kidnap? genocide treason, or all of the above? the confederate battle flag is a symbol of racial hatred and depression. it stood for the defense of the institution of slavery. it is time to banish it to the dustbin of history which is where it belongs. it is my honor and privilege to yield to the distinguished gentleman, from the great state of california i may put in a motion to make him an honorary member of the congressional black caucus. [laughter] >> thank you very much. two days ago i was proud to introduce along with my

colleague one of the amendments at issue here. amendments that would ban the sale of confederate battle flags and in our national parks and prevent the display of these symbols on national cemetery gravesites. i was cleaned i was pleased when it passed by voice vote. hopefully throughout the south in the same way that we have seen corporate america stuff up on this issue and realize we have to stop providing nostalgic cover for the symbols of racism and segregation and hatred and slavery, i thought we were there. in the last 24 hours, to see the reversal within the republican caucuses shocking and disappointing. two seed in the context of the

procedural maneuvers and obstructionist tactics they have taken to prevent the resolution from having a vote in this house is also shocking and disappointing. i have no doubt the u.s. congress will do the right thing read we will step up and vote to get rid of the symbols of hatred and segregation and slavery as we should have long ago. unfortunately we are unable to speak with one voice on this issue today because of a faction within the republican caucus that is out of step with the times we live then, would swear the country wants us to go on this issue, and the values our country holds dear. i hope that we will get through this and have that vote and do the right thing. unfortunately we are unable to do that today. with that it is my honor to yield to my friend from louisiana -- or my friend from minnesota.

who without whose work on the floor late last night to catch what looks like an innocuous technical amendment, we may not be here with the opportunity to have a recorded vote on this. [applause] >> well, the interior bill is a polluter's dream profiteering from pollution for those who want to not follow the law. it had one bright spot and it. funding for our native american brothers and sisters. because of the amendments of mr. jefferson mr. hoffman, it had two more bright spots added to a terrible bill. i sat on the floor when these gentlemen introduce their amendments. i was proud of the fact that

there was no objection raised from the other side of the aisle. i thought, america at its best. we are doing better. and then last night around 8:00 when we were ready to wrap up the bill, there was a flurry of activity. then a little bit of disruption as the chairman of the committee started talking about wildfires in striking the last word. people coming to the floor from the leadership offices of speaker boehner. i noticed the parliamentarian was called off in the speaker's lobby to discuss something. then we were presented with an amendment that you couldn't tell what it was going to do. the staff on the appropriations committee was very quick to point out what it was doing. the amendment adopted by the

whole house ban the sale of confederate flag items and the amendment that was offered by chairman caliber was a attempt to negate this important amendments. it also went as far as to block the june 24 national park memorandum into law. which is what mr. hoffman was doing. it even tied the agency's hand to take action against other partners who would ignore park service requests, or voluntarily withdraw the confederate sale items. then it went further. it started moving toward keeping us from having her voice expressed as a house. an amendment that is not transparent and clear in what it is doing is an amendment that is deceitful.

i believe it was deceived on the entire house of representatives to have an amendment come forward that didn't mention confederate flag in it once. i'm very sad we have come to a point where the will of the house to speak out against hate to speak out against racism was to be undone without any transparency at all. we called for a rollcall vote. they obviously needed as we found out cents, leadership. the film wasn't bad enough for some republicans. to put in hate, to put in racism permanently into it by not allowing our park service to

withdraw these objectionable items. i'm pleased that we have brought this to everyone's attention with the underlying issue is, that we need to put an end to the confederate battle flag in our public spaces. i would yield to mr. richmond from louisiana. >> thank you so much. i came up here and was going to start with something my grandmother used to always tell me often, forgive them for they know not what they do. the sad part your today, and the part that frightens me is that they know exactly what they are doing. also, being the son and grandson of southern parents and

grandparents who raised me in mississippi and louisiana the one thing that they stressed to me was the new testament. watching those families in south carolina who exhibited the best of the best by showing grace and mercy as they forgave the perpetrator. i stand here today praying for my republican colleagues who can't find the courage in their hearts, in their souls who are letting big hits and people who would reaffirm inferiority racism, and negative things. they are letting them win. the own thing i can do, the only thing we can do as a caucuses

continue to fight for what we believe then i continue to pray for them that they will see the light. this is one nation with one flag. that we will only be a better country when we learn to love. it is sad to say that we have a body that represents this united states, and half of this body today let hate when you we will continue to love -- let hate win . we will continue to love. this nation is better than what we exhibited today. we will win and show love has a place in this country. we welcome everybody in it and everybody is fit. this is not a symbol of anything that we stand for, and the

notion of the south will rise again is not something that we look forward to. we look forward to this country rising above hate and rising toward love. thank you. with that, i will introduce our share of our hispanic caucus and the best member of the baseball team, that will be linda sanchez. >> thank rep. sanchez: i'm proud to stand with my colleagues behind me. i'm not quite sure how we got here, but i'm disappointed we have to be here today, fighting something that is a divisive symbol for this country. my parents are immigrants to this country. they love this country. one thing i remember my father talking about growing up was that a house divided against itself cannot stand. yet here we are, in the 21st

century, talking about argument fighting over symbols that are symbols of racism, oppression obtain, and for many minority communities, even interrogated -- 10terror. the only place the confederate flag lungs the pages of history. as the chair of the hispanic caucus, we will stand, b vogel, and we will be allowed. how ironic on a day when south carolina's legislature took action to ban the flag here we are in the united states congress in the halls of the united states congress having to fight that battle. i sincerely hope that my republican majority can come to the same conclusion that we do.

devices symbols have no place above our federal public spaces. [speaking spanish] and now it is my pleasure to introduce our final speaker, the chair of the congressional black caucus, mr. butterfield. rep. butterfield: thank you very much. as the congresswoman said, i'm the last speaker so i will be brief so we can open up the process for questions and answers. i am indeed the chairman of the congressional black caucus.

we have 26 members, 20% of the house democratic caucus, and 10% of the house of representatives. we are vitally interested in the work of the house of representatives. what happened today at offense all of us to say the least. let me publicly thank beautiful oc for bringing this privileged resolution today. it was a very thoughtful resolution and it was certainly necessary and i asked the question after 150 years since slavery came to an end must we still have a debate over the confederate flag. most of you certainly know that i too am from a southern state. i live in north carolina and i remember seeing the confederate flag all of my life. confederate flags still fly in my hometown every day. they are on cars and trucks and oliver our community. -- all over our community could it is not the heritage question that ought to be addressed. it is that we are one nation,

like mr. richman said, and the confederate flag has no place in our committees could without question the confederate flag offends the congressional black caucus b. it offends all decent americans everywhere. we are so proud of what happened in south carolina last night . the south carolina legislature had the courage to do the right thing that we must. . now we must focus on mississippi. we asked the leadership to expedite consideration of ms. policies resolution as well as mr. thompson's resolution because america is waiting for an answer. i call all my colleagues to be thoughtful and rivers the actions of last evening. let us get busy with the business that the american people care about.

that is creating jobs and expanding medicaid and doing things that will power -- empower america's families to be better. let's put the confederate flag issue to rest. thank you very much. rep. pelosi: i think it is important to note that the coincidences of time are remarkable. on the 47th anniversary of the 14th amendment, on the very day that south carolina will have the bill signed to take down the flag, on that very day the republicans had to take down that appropriations bill. it is important to note this. the reason they proposed the calvert amendment last night was because, as their chairman said, they feared losing 100 of their members because of the jefferies-hoffman amendment. is that remarkable?

100 of their members would vote against the bill as congresswoman mccollum said. the bill was not bad enough for them. they needed something worse. the police and and the special-interest, but they needed hatred in the bill as well. that is what is interesting. we have this conversation with you here for one reason. we were not able to speak on the floor. it is highly unusual for a privileged resolution offered by the leader of one of the parties on the floor to be denied any not one minute of the day. they yielded that all of their time because they were afraid of what our colleagues said. i tell you that they were more afraid of what those 100 members of congress might come to the floor and say in defense of the calvert amendment. here we are on this day of so

many coincidences. letting do not -- let me not paint the brush of the south of those 100 members of the republican side. many of them fought under the american flag. patriotism lives there as well. this is not about them. it is about us. and who we are and how committed we are to when we take that oath, i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty justice, justice for all. that is what we want right now. justice for all. i'm so pleased to have so many of our colleagues here with the resource to answer any questions

you may have. >> speaker weiner said he wanted a bipartisan conversation from a formal bipartisan group to talk about congressional response to the confederate flag. i'm eager to hear others as well. leader nancy pelosi, can you describe what he had -- whether you had conversations? rep. pelosi: what do we have to study? we have to study hatred in the confederate flag? it is simple. it is about time. two weeks since june 25, now they are referring my resolution to committee. now they want to set up a commission. let us not wait one more minutes and take down that flag in the capital. rep. butterfield: i recall president obama's usually and he addressed the question of whether we need to continue to have the conversation. the answer is no.

we need action. we have had this conversation for 150 years now and it is time for thoughtful people to do what president abraham lincoln did at the end of the civil war, and that was to take decisive action and rid this country of white supremacy and bigotry and hatred. though, i do not support the idea of a commission. the time for talking and having a conversation is over. i think it is time for action. the house of representatives needs to act immediately. >> what does it say to you about the republican party? do they just not get it on the offensive symbol or do they not care? what is the next step if you cannot force a -- a vote? rep. pelosi: public sentiment is everything. you can account was almost

anything with it. they will be waiting a flight felt -- white flag soon on the republican side to end this issue of taking down the confederate battle flag. i think you can make your own judgment about a party that says we will lose 100 of our members on the appropriations bill if we have legislation in there that limits the opportunity for people to buy the confederate flag. anybody else want to speak to that? >> under any circumstances, even in a limited way, could there ever be a time in the future with the flag could be in a confined way displayed? rep. butterfield: the privileged resolution spoke to putting it in museums or localities where

other artifacts of history are held. there is no way of trying to push it off. but the question is -- it needs to be in its rightful place. where the symbols are now according to my privileged resolution, is not the right place. >> what about your own state flag? where should that be in the conversation now? rep. jeffries: there's not much difference in the confederate flag symbol that is being take them down in south carolina in my state like it it is a major issue. some of my colleagues paid attention to it for the first time. they jumped when they saw it because of the symbol. what we are trying to do, and i'm trying to say even to my people back home, we can do better. the good thing is that rc republican united states senators said we need to change

it. for that very same reason, hopefully we can get enough energy without situations like south carolina happening to get a change. >> what my question. -- one more question. >> are you looking or calling for the removal -- the mississippi state flag and other flag seem to be influenced by the confederate flag. are you just looking for mississippi? rep. richmond: my resolution only speaks to the mississippi flag in its present form. there are other symbols or artifacts, but it speaks specifically to the flag. there are certain areas where we fly it. it gives them out to those members from mississippi to choose to fly it in front of

their offices. we respect that, but there are certain other areas here on the house side where we fly it. rep. thompson: i clearly think that's inappropriate. rep. pelosi: thank you all very much. i think my colleagues and i think all of you being here. we could not speak on the floor, but we will. i want to thank betty mccollum again because she was the linchpin for catching what we were doing in the appropriations bill. thank you, betty.

>> the ruckus over the confederate flag in the u.s. house began wednesday night and debate on the 2016 interior environment spending bill. a late amendment by ken calvert of california. for perspective, we are joined by devon henry with the help. he is from capitol hill. what was the amendment do? devon: the house passed to democratic amendments to diminish the flight. the amendments would ban small flags from confederate gravesites at the cemeteries and then future sales. calvin's amendment would basically undo both of us. it would go back to to current

policies that are on the books right now, basically allowing the small flags to be put at gravesites and allowing the sale of merchandise. >> that amendment came up and debate late wednesday evening. thursday morning comes around and speeches happen on the house floor, particularly from democrats about this amendment. what happened after that? devon: public leadership hold the bill. he had a lot of questions on this. he did not want the flight to become a political football and he wanted it to be a more serious discussion on this lack. he knew it would become a distraction for this bill. he didn't hold the amendment but the phone bill itself. -- the full bill itself. >> from your perspective, was democratic leadership taken by surprise by this amendment on wednesday night and the reaction on thursday morning? devin: betty mccollum was

managing debate for democrats and she said that she was really surprised and taken aback at the back of this amendment would come up, especially so soon after democrats were able to insert their amendments. they really rallied around this issue. they had a series of speakers ready to go on the floor on thursday morning they had a printout of the life of a used on the floor and they were slamming both the flag and the decision to take up this amendment they were ready to go and try to defeat this. >> dimension john boehner's reaction. you tweeted about that thing, boehner on flag, i believe it is time for some members to sit down and have a conversation on how to deal with this issue in a responsible way. any indication of what he is looking for there? devin: my guess is that if this is a longer-lasting story, he may have to lay out how he needs.

a lot of states are considering their flag displays. it has been an issue that has come up on the help with regards to flags that incorporate that image around the capitol complex. it may be something that there needs to be a bigger reckoning on at some point. >> on that issue, democrats are looking to have the mississippi state like, which has become ever that a flag in it removed from house buildings on the capitol complex. where does that stand? devin: that was the amendment that nancy pelosi put on the floor, forcing republicans to vote on whether or not remove that flag. republicans said no. they did that with another democratic resolution on the same matter earlier a couple weeks ago. she really caused a bit of ruckus on the floor. there was a raucous debate on the floor because of that with a lot of chancellor and everything like that. it was more of a protest than anything else.

republicans were not going to back that bill at the time. it allowed democrats to go after republicans. >> the amendment was proposed by ken calvert of california. he released a statement saying that he was asked by gop leadership to put forth this amendment based on the request of some southern republicans. what was behind that? devin: southern republicans have come up to say that they were upset that these democratic amendments were attached to the bill without the being able to vote on it. there was concern on the public and leadership that they may not be enough votes to pass the underlying bill. if a vulcan's did not get the chance to vote on some these amendments obviously. republicans were upset that they were attached and they wanted a chance to vote on it. representative calvert said yes, i put up this amendment for a vote, but it was what leadership wanted to try to push

the overall interior environment appropriations bill across the finish line. devin: is there any indication that the timing of this governor haley signing the bill into law in south carolina on thursday that the timing of this vote would have happened at the same time? any indication that house republicans were mindful of that? devin: the issues they addressed on this were really about the issues that congress was dealing with -- the fact that these two amendments were attached on tuesday and that republicans wanted to repeal and undo those amendments. i do not think what happened in south carolina played into that as well. it was the opposite result in south carolina as well. >> they are not done with this issue, but they delayed the final consideration. what happens when it finally comes up? devin: that is what to do the interesting part. that bill has been very hard to

pass. already have a kratz were opposed to this bill because of the cuts to the environmental protection agency and the ways it went about blocking obama administration climate rules. this confederate flag issue put them over the top. betty mccollum said that they went from a mail on this bill to a hell no on this bill. they have to resolve this flag is you and they want to get the bill on the floor entered the house. they will not have help from democrats to do it. they have the find a way to get around the flag issue first. devin: you can follow him on twitter at the henry. >> tonight on c-span, south carolina governor iggy hayley signed a bill to remove the confederate flag from the statehouse. after that, paul ryan discusses the economy and tax policy. later, epa administrator gina mccarthy testifies about her

agency's regulatory agenda. >> thursday afternoon, surrounded by the families of the mine victims of the shooting at the church in south carolina, governor nikki haley signed a bill to remove the confederate flag from the statehouse. the nine pence used to sign the legislation will go to the victims families. the ceremony lasted 10 minutes. governor haley: it is hard for us to look at what is happening today and not think back to 22 days ago. it seems like so long ago. because the agreement has been so hard. at the same time, we have all been struck by what was a tragedy that we did not think we would ever encountered. nine amazing people that forever

changed south carolina's history. having said that, i have to acknowledge the series of events that take place through all of this. because it is the true story of south carolina, the actions that took place on what will go down in the history books. nine people took in someone who did not look like them or act like them. and with true love and truth they -- true faith and sure acceptance they sat and prayed with him for an hour. that love and fate was so strong that it bought -- brought grace to their family. it showed them how to forget it then we saw the actions of forgiveness. we saw the family show the world

what true forgiveness and grace looks like. that forgiveness and grace set off another action, and action of compassion by people all across south carolina and all across this country. they stopped looking at each other's differences. they started looking at each other similarities. because we are all experiencing the same pain. then you take that compassion and that compassion motivated action. that compassion motivated people wanting to do something about it. the action was taken by the general assembly. and what we saw and that's what action by both the house and senate was we saw members start to see what it was like to be in each other's shoes. start to see what it felt like. we heard about the true honor of

heritage and tradition. we heard about the true pain that many have felt. and waits took the time to understand it. i saw passions get caught. -- hot. i saw passions get low, but i thought commitment never ending date what we saw was another action. that action is that the confederate flag is coming off the grounds of the south carolina statehouse. [applause] [cheering] [applause] governor haley: tomorrow morning at 10:00 a.m., we will see the confederate flag come down. we are a state that believes in tradition. we are state that believes in history. we are a state that believes in respect. we will bring it down with dignity and we will make sure it

is put in its rightful place. but this is a story about action. this is a story about a history of south carolina. and how the action of nine individuals laid out this long chain of events that forever show the state of south carolina what love and forgiveness looks like. and i will tell you that now this is to our children. when they go back and look at the history books, while we are still grieving, and the grieving is going to last for a long time, when the emotion start to fade, the history of the action that took place by everyone in south carolina to get us to this moment is one that we can all be proud of. 22 days ago, i do not know that i would ever be able to say this again, but today i am very proud to say that it is a great day in

south carolina. [applause] governor haley: so with that, we do not want to wait any longer. we are now going to sign the bill. i want to say it was with great pride that i'm surrounded by members of the emanuel nine family. i want to thank them for coming. i want to thank the senators who came together to say, while we have been a part of south carolina's last, we want to see this part of south carolina's future going into the right direction.

i want to thank everybody who is with me today. [laughter]

governor haley: with that, i'm proud to say the bill has been signed. i do want to acknowledge these nine pens are going to the families of the emmanuel nine. [applause] governor haley: may we never forget the actions that those people took to get us to this point today. and then i've got a couple of other pens. many people have talked about the kurds that took -- courage that took place by so many across the state. but one person start this almost two decades ago. that was governor david beasley. the last time i saw him, i said,

you started it. he said, now i need you to finish it. [applause] governor haley: and the second one is someone who also understand what this can feel like, what the intentions can feel like, what it to do something. he worked very hard and was the person to bring the confederate flag on the dome. i want to thank you for all you have done for south carolina. thank you. [applause] governor haley: and these two are for me. with that, i will tell you thank you very much. thank you for making it another great day in south carolina. we are looking forward to the future and the future of our children. thank you very much and god bless. [applause]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> the call for the removal of the confederate flag was prompted by the killing of nine people in the historic church in charleston on june 17. the flag will be taken down from the south carolina statehouse at 10:00 a.m. on writing. -- friday. >> the next "washington journal," congressman bobby scott is here to discuss the no child left behind bill and other education issues. then a look at the impact of the environmental protection agency 's congressman bruce westermann

of arkansas. "washington journal" live every morning on c-span. you can join the conversation with your calls and comments on facebook and twitter. marks friday, the heritage foundation held a panel. see it at noon eastern. >> here is some of our featured programs. with the upcoming release of harper lee's new novel c-span2' s book tv focuses on the award-winning novelist. we talk about the impact of lee's book, "a chilly mockingbird." -- "to kill a mockingbird." also on sunday night at 10:00

hugh hewitt on hillary clinton second run for president. on c-span saturday night starting at 8:00 eastern congressional debt commemoration of the vietnam war. and sunday evening at 6:30, carly fiorina visits with new hampshire voters. and on american history tv, flagler college professor on the factors that led to the great depression and president roosevelt's actions to help the american people and the economy. sunday evening at 6:30, jeff shara on general sherman. and why he is not the villain of popular legend. get a complete we can schedule on www.c-span.org. >> next, paul ryan talks about the u.s. economy, tax policy

and the 2016 presidential race. he was interviewed by then white -- ben white. this is 45 minutes. [applause] ben let's start with some international stuff. i am interested in your opinion on the extension, if greece ends up leaving the euro, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, if that could destabilize, will the

markets come back and impact the u.s. in a major negative way? ryan: i don't think so. i say it is a cautionary tale. it is a good lesson of what progressive economics gets you. eventually, you run out of other people's money to spend. i think the downside is, if they relax their terms, then you are basically tailing portugal, spain, others you don't have to fulfill the terms of the credit. . go. i don't think they have a choice in europe. that choice is up to the greeks. we will see if they will come back to the terms.

ben: it would be worse for europe if they were to cave to greece without special reforms. what about china, the stock market there. >> i agree with that. >> what about china the collapse of the stock market their, the combination of those two things in presented to ryan: for churro enterprise economics. and whether his progressive policies, which are spend other peoples money barro, taxes low your economy down doesn't work a living beyond your means racking up unfunded liabilities for the governate makes promises it knows he can't keep those days are numbered in this world. they should be. on china i think they have been practicing i guess sugar high

economics. china has been really pumping the keynesian type prime. that only lasts a long and it's not built upon a strong foundation of the basics for a market economy the rule of law property rights, transparency. you don't have that in china so they been practicing they have been on a sugar high and they are coming down off the sugar high. >> let's jump to u.s. domestic political issues. you have got basically one big ticket item that you have got to get done before the recess and that's a highway funding bill. where do you find that $11 billion can you, i know you're interested in getting repatriation exemption as a possible funding mechanism for that. if you're about to compensate can you get a six-year? >> and 10 seconds we found three that only cost 8 billion not 11. it's eight from now to the end of the year so let me say a

couple of things. we will have to do an extension for the year this month because it is impossible to put in place a six-year financing package for highways in the next two weeks and we are trying to impress this point upon our colleagues. we in the house and i can speak for the house we want a six-year highway bill. we want to give states the ability to plan ahead but that means we have to come up with a way to do long-term financing. given that we are not going to raise gas taxes it's a losing revenue source. they are far more effective and efficient. we did come up with a new revenue source but were not going to do that in the next few months so we need to have a bridge financing plan that gets us a six-year bill so at the end of that time period where hopefully by then figuring out how to have the user see -- user fee system. we have two plans. plan a a. is what you just

mentioned can we also address an issue that is really gaining momentum which is this international pressure and problem we have of our tax base leaving us, companies leaving america and fix that which would involve a repatriation which could help with this issue. that's what our first preference is and we are in discussions with our colleagues on how to do that. if we can't get an agreement on on that and we on that than we do the plan b and that means we have to come up with the resources to cover the trust fund shortfall which right now over six-year period is $90 billion; as this fall we know where we are and we will do plan a macroplan b and we will need a couple of months to put that together. >> in the short term is a journal fund transfer. >> we will pay for it. >> how we going to do that? >> stay tuned. >> the answers there is no answer. >> we have our own opinions and

drafts. >> do they involve searching couch cushions? >> we have the gun the search and we are working on a buy-in. >> explained to me before you move on to that how much revenue do you expect a comment if you you were able to get this agreement on overseas repatriation of income how much would that generate in what's the mechanism for moving back to transportation? >> i don't know the answer to the first question because the scores are moving around. it's a moving target. i don't want to give you a number because it will change tomorrow. but the way that this works is if we move -- there are two ways you don't do repatriation. you don't do a holiday and by the way that cost money these days and you don't just deem money without converting your system over because that would be a really bad policy. so you go from a worldwide system where we are the only industrial country that does this. it's a terrible policy that is killing jobs making american

companies less competitive. you switch to an exemption system much like the rest of the world where everyday is a repatriation and you can always bring the money home but you have to convert the system over in that conversion is a deemed repatriation where you get a one-time shot of tax revenues that come in because you have to do that. going forward if you don't do that you'll have old money and old system of tax credits and new money money in the new system that's exempt and it's really difficult to keep track of that he there is really no way to convert the system over without doing it this way and what that does is it rings a one-time shot of money into the federal treasury around 100 billion let's say. it's probably north of that and that is what we see is a one-time piece of money and what we are making sure it doesn't come at the expense of tax reform. we think there's a way of doing that soap would you tax reform on international in addition to the highway issue.

>> will you get buy-in from the frustration on the idea this permanent exemption? >> i believe so but i don't know he. >> does the schumer portman bill give you some hope? >> i think schumer and portman that they are both people i talk to a lot lately. rob is one of my closest friends here. the schumer portman framework tracks with what the house has been doing for the last couple of years so we see that framework as the essence of what it could look like. the fact that you have a democrat agreeing with the republican free market we have been working on for a few years gives me a bit of hope. >> what about the export-import bank? there's a good chance people will try to attach that to short-term highway funding to get ex-im wrappers despite your opposition and a lot of conservative republicans. what happens? what would you do if ex-im got attached to its? >> i don't want to attach ex-im to anything let alone the highway bill. i would rather the house but did

gather a clean bill and send it to the senate and called it a day. that's my preference. if something comes from the senate and i will repeat what the speaker has said jeb hensarling is our lead person on ex-im bank, go after with various amendments. i obviously support jeb doing that but i don't support putting it into a high-interest fun. we should just acclaim extension. >> is it your view that ex-im is dead for good? >> that's my view. i don't know if i can project that is dead for good. look, 1% of exports are tax-exempt. i'm a 99% of our exports aren't. it goes to a handful of really big companies and we are basically using taxpayer money to subsidize the credit for transactions of really large companies and the transactions to subsidize foreign businesses subsidizing american businesses. we are helping delta's or

competitors by cheaper planes so this isn't something the government should be involved in. this is to me the government putting the thumb on the scale picking winners and losers at very narrow group of people getting access to the federal treasury to subsidize their credit. the argument is typically other countries do this so we should to. i don't believe that. we should be exporting american free enterprise capitalism, not crony capitalism. american free enterprise capitalism so let's get a moral authority here and that is why i think ex-im offends these critical principles of free enterprise economics. let's talk about what free enterprise capitalism is. >> i don't want to spend a lot of time on ex-im because i have in my lifetime and life is too short for that but what about the argument who do export now and will not be a will to export the dot ex-im but the private market will not step in and make

those loans? >> they are small fraction. they got into you this to use it as political cover and i think they will. if the government comes in to provide subsidized credit then who can compete with that? i think there will be a private-sector alternative but more to the point if there isn't a private-sector alternative than we are supposed to put our hard-working taxpayers at risk for subsidizing questionable risky loans? why should i ask you you and you have to give me your money to give to these businesses? >> i'm not going to get dried down in the ex-im -- i'm going to bring an atom who has a question for you. >> i wanted to ask you about 2016. the you are the tax budget guru. would he think about the plans that have been rolling out? their early ones. would he think of that?

>> i then looked at it in detail but the way look at these is great. i want to see a vibrant debate on our side of the aisle about how to replace obamacare about how to fix her country's economic fiscal problems how to restore our availability. i think it's fantastic that people are putting plans out there. i did this with budget years old go. i think it's wonderful that more willing to stick their necks out there and put specifics out there. what i don't like about national politics is when it gravitates to big platitudes and becomes personally contest. i think the country is better preserved by people running for office saying here's exactly what i want to do. here is who i am and what i believe and here's my plan. >> in that spirit can you tell us specifically what you like and marco rubio's plan? >> that he has one number one.

honestly they had the guts to put one out there and number two it goes to a couple of principles, lower tax rates across-the-board and the attempts attacks income which is an important principle and tax reform. his is like attacks. there are many different moving parts. what i choose to try not to do as chairman of the ways & means committee is to be the referee of these things and say what's good and what's bad. i want to encourage a good debate and in the ways & means committee we are going to look at our own options. so i just feel because of the position i have i shouldn't be trying to douse the enthusiasm are people putting their plans out there so i try not to be critical of specific aspects of the plans. other than to encourage our candidates to do it. more candidates that are specifics out there the more the rest well and that more our party will be a party of ideas. >> would stay on the 2016 team for mom meant because jeb bush's

talk about a plan that could generate 4% economic growth which is in the ambitious target essentially twice worry are now about the typical growth rate over the last few decades. he said yesterday people are going to have to work longer hours. i think he would maybe want that phrasing back if he could do it over again but what did you think of that? can jeb bush deliver 4% economic growth? >> absolutely weekend get to 4% growth of the get the fundamentals right hated i don't know the context that he said longer hours and that i think what he is getting at is we have a problem in our economy into many people at part-time work and they want full-time work. if you look at our labor market problems right now the employment rate is pretty low and i looks great, 5.3. there's a bigger story here in the bigger story is since 1978 or 1977 we have this level of a labor force participation. that's tens of millions of

able-bodied adults in america not working not looking for work not in school to get training our people in part-time jobs when they want full-time work so that's the problem which is too many people are not getting on the ladder of life. they are on this motion of upper mobility. what these candidates are trying to get at is how do you restore upper mobility? i views restore faith that the american ideas still here with the condition of your birth doesn't determine the outcome of your life. if you work hard you can rise. you have the right to rise in this country and if you make a mistake you can redeem yourself. that to me is such a critical element of what america's all about and the problem is there are a lot of people who don't believe that anymore. it's for generations in their their neighborhoods or families

they haven't experienced it. they don't have faith in us anymore. that's a real problem in so we need to get at that and i hope our candidates and we on congress to be working on this as well. i spent the last two work -- years working on opportunity issues. i think that is what is trying to get out. >> i didn't hear in there and answer to how you get 4% economic growth. what specific things would you do? >> two or three things, tax reform regulatory reform. the pace of regulations flying out of these builders around us is incredible. it's putting a chilling effects -- >> i see some now. >> the labor department is right over there. so i think health care reform which gets to debt. we have this big overhanging debt.

we are still making promises to generations of americans that the government cannot keep bennett knows it so quick and get us off the debt crisis cleanup our tax system get a regulations sane and reasonable and also i think this energy opportunity we have in our country, incredible seized that opportunity, think if you do those handful of things right there we are in good shape. it's the basics and the fundamentals. do five or six things things and so much will fall into place and i do believe we need to focus on restoring upper mobility and fighting poverty. people are stuck in poverty. economic mobility is not moving. it's stuck and i think there's a lot we can do but you can't fix fix it without economic growth and in addition to economic growth you have to do more to help get people on with their life. >> speaking out jeb bush i did a piece not long ago about his economic advisers. you are mentioned as somebody he relies on for fiscal budget

policy matters. how closely are you involved in any one campaign but jobs in particular? >> i chair this thing called the presidential trust or the republican national committee which is heading the general election fund three nominee. because i chair this effort which is to basically build the general election campaign pre-nominees but it's ready to go when the nominee arrives a week handover that her senate turnkey operation it lessons learned from the last point. we realize that there are things that should have been done that didn't get done after the last election. so i'm cheering that effort to get those things done. because of that i stay in switzerland and i speak to whichever candidate wants to talk, whoever advisers and we know each other pretty well. so i'm basically happy to talk to anyone. >> switzerland is not necessarily one that comes to mind. >> neutral.

>> there is much more 2016 we could do but we want to talk about policy because we are obsessed with it. on the question of trade you had a big fight over tba. you got that done ultimately. was there ever a point in that debate when you thought you would not be able to deliver tpa to the president's desk? it seemed like you are confident the whole time but it did hang in the balance and people like elizabeth ward were eating it up like crazy. did you ever fear you couldn't get that done? >> i thought failure was not an option. that's what i have an attitude toward what i do. if we had failed to do this when when -- then we have said of clinical parties have decided america's not going to age -- engage. that was not an option. when pelosi we didn't know she was going to do this. i was watching her speech at the end of the first round of the

debates when she came out against taa something they insisted had to be part of this and try to sink the bill by going after that. that's when i realized this was in trouble and that's when kevin and i right there on the floor mccarty we decided let's go with the vote. i won't go until the details here and we went to ron ron kind to really exercise courage and leadership in this thing. we went to ron and said we are going to have this done anyway, are you guys with those? we had the vote any way, prove that we have the votes that the votes and i think because we did doubt that gives the ability to come back and separate the two issues so they couldn't play the sabotage game and then get it done. there was isaiah 20 minute moment where i wasn't sure between when she said no tpa went down and we decided to bring the vote up anyway and be passive. once we pass it i realized we could find a way to get this

done. >> were you disappointed that hillary clinton didn't take a firm stand on tpa? >> that isn't even softball. that's t-ball. >> are you disappointed in hillary clinton? [laughter] or you could endorse her for president. but i mean it does speak to this larger issue of where trade is with the democrats right now and obviously she worked on tpp. >> i am familiar with that. if america decides not to lead in shaping the global economy in writing the rules of the global economy in the 21st century than who will? china. look what's going on over there. europe. why would we want to do that? so if you want to lead this

country, lead this country and show you were willing to take tough stands to do what's necessary to lead the country and if you are not willing to do that then you are probably not displaying leadership. >> let's talk about completing tpp. what role if any do you play in that now in terms of the final stage negotiations? when do you expect it to get done and particular one element that's causing problems is the farmer provisions that would protect intellectual property for u.s. pharmaceutical companies. some say this might be a detriment to poor countries who don't have generic drugs. should there be protections for big pharma? >> you made should there be protections for intellectual property and patents? should businesses that invest hundreds of millions of dollars in technologies that make our lives better have the ability to recoup those investments are they can do more? >> that's not exactly what i'm asking but it's in the ballpark. >> look again, america.

we write the rules or somebody else writes the rules and we want to protect and -- patents? that is what capitalism and it is and that's what free enterprises. .. being assembled and know i. the 23rd while the 30th i think commodes is long

which is a long enough time hopefully that they can reconcile outstanding issues. there are still a pretty good amount about sending of outstanding issues, canadians need to step it up and get serious. the malaysians need to come to the table. i can go on and on and on. >> i am pretty impressed. >> taken the subtle level. >> i appreciated. >> so a lot still has to be done but i think there was a pause. now that tpa is done have come to the table to finish this. we are very much involved because we fashion tpa that had all these guidelines. all we are doing right now command we had a long talk

yesterday, making, making sure that the negotiators stick to the guidelines a congress late in front of them with tpa. we monitor this on a day-to-day ongoing basis to make sure that the final agreement conforms to what congress says needs to be in a final agreement and the things are not that we say cannot. clicks. >> how confident are you that once it gets through to people have a 60 day time frame. >> a 30 day. clicks and do you think that you can get it through? >> if they negotiate a very good deal, yeah. again, they have got to negotiate a good deal. look i remember dave camps in korea back to the drawing board when they mess up the other provisions. they provisions. they went back and fix that. they have to get it right. they have to get a good agreement. high-quality clive senate agreement for us to do with it. and so is the pressure

on the negotiators? yeah. but. >> i want to jump back a little bits of the 2016 campaign in your decision not to run. he said of the time that you wanted to be involved as you are very clearly in all these issues. tax reform trade. but you also said that it's going to take to get the contacts that you want to get done. why would you not be the person in the white house who is running off on these things in the house ways and means committee? >> i i think i guess it is a phase of life thing. i feel like i'm 45 years old, chairman of the ways and means committee of the 12 and 13 -year-old at home. make a huge difference from the country. these issues contrary contact, poverty, fighting healthcare reform, go through the ways and means committee of. i could be held on the

weekends. and so it is effective. clicks i i think we're going to do feel. these provinces provinces, incredible. we re-signed the key. he is healthy. the ponte adams come our third receiver. i am one of the owners. owners. [inaudible conversations] >> both owners of the packers. i think they're going to team up on nelson income and evolved is going to have a good year. when you see an nfl team that has things like defensive backs and cornerbacks you know your in a good place. >> you guys get to see what

he cared about. >> let's jump back to the hill and fast-forward through the august recess the government funding deadline. every going to have another fight to get that down for last-minute? a government shutdown? can you sign an agreement that is palatable? >> i think the question is will the democrats in the senate try to shortchange the minimum and in the military by trying to derail the defense appropriations bill? they tried to play politics. i think there will be a very bad thing to the detriment of our military. if they succeed in filibustering