austin for the texas book festival, and near the end of the month we will cover two book festivals on the same weekend. it is the wisconsin book festival in madison, and on the east coast, the boston book festival. in portland, and live for the 18th year in a row for the miami book fair international. the fairs and of festivals this fall on c-span 2's "book tv." withwsmakers is next congressman jordan of ohio. former newr from york governor george pataki, then former pennsylvania senator rick santorum, who are both seeking the republican nomination. "newsmakers" is

congressman jim jordan of ohio. break, he wasust home in his district. he has said he will judge congress by how they perform this month. hisill talk about expectations and voter expectations. bob, you are up first. >> there has been a lot of speculation about speaker boehner's future. a resolution by one of your colleagues to oust this speaker. you voted for the speaker ohio colleague at the beginning of this congress. do you think john boehner has done a good job as speaker? guest: what i know is this. we have big issues coming up.

the country is coming up. we have the iran issue we are debating this week. we have the funding the government issue along with this huge question about planned parenthood and the fact that they should not be getting any taxpayer dollars as we move forward. shortly after that, we have the highway bill potentially, the xm corporate welfare concept. we have a number of big things coming up. frankly, i think everyone is watching not just the speakers but congress. our charges are real simple. this is what the house is about. do what we said we are going to do. if we do that and focus on that, that is the real task. i think the country is looking at all of us, not just those of us who may be in the official leadership positions. journalist: can i follow that up? i want to get more information

on that. if someone offers a privileged resolution to replace, a motion to vacate, would you vote for that? guest: that is not the question. that may be the question at some point down the road. the focus now is on the big issues we have in front of us. those are huge. that is what the american people want to do is adjust the big concerns, do what we told him we were going to do. focus on the things that we got elected to do. if we do that, then i think we are actually fulfilling the promise we made to them when they gave us the privilege of serving in the house of representatives of the united states congress.

journalist: how would you rate john boehner as a speaker? guest: i have said this for four and a half years. it is a tough job. he has to deal with barack obama, harry reid, nancy pelosi, and guys like me. it is not an easy thing. it is a very difficult job. i would have done things different. every member of congress would have done things different. you all know there has been times when the freedom caucus took a different position than our leadership. those are well-documented. the test is coming up. let's see how we all do. i represent the same number of people as john boehner. it is we. we have to do what we told the voters we would focus on doing. that has to be our mission. all the time, frankly, but there is a heightened focus on it this fall. journalist: a big issue right now, you mentioned before, planned parenthood federal funding. the speculation is on capitol hill that there will probably be some kind of short-term continued resolution that will plant a big decisions down the road, maybe to christmas. that continued resolution, what does that contain -- what if that contains funding for

planned parenthood? guest: i don't know if it is likely to. it may. i certainly hope it is not. i will be pushing for the position that that organization, after what we now know, what we have now seen on video -- the old picture is worth a thousand words -- we have on video where this organization was engaged in the most repulsive activity you can think about, and what may be criminal activity. they should not get another penny of your tax dollars, my tax dollars, and the families i get the privilege of representing in ohio. if we just make that argument that clear. we will take the money that was going to this organization which is engaged in what we now know they were doing, terrible activity, take that money and put it over here. same level of funding.

if the president and harry reid think we can pass that, we insist upon this organization continuing to get your tax dollars, if they say that is more important than funding our troops, funding our veterans, and frankly, funding women's health issues, they will have to defend that position with the american people. i think that is such a common sense logical position. we have to make the case in a compelling and repetitive way over and over again so that the american people clearly understand what is at stake. journalist: is a cr -- if the house passes a cr with the provision barring planned parenthood from being funded as you want and the senate strips it out and sends it back, what happens at that point? would you like to see your leadership do at that point? guest: we don't know what happens then because we have several -- we have 20 more days of debate. lots of things change in 20

days. you guys saw what changed this week when we decided to go a different way on the iranian nuclear resolution issue in the house. things can change. as i said yesterday to a few reporters, even though check does not about the whole -- bellachik does not get another -- even bellachik does not script out the whole game -- i hope they don't get another dime of federal money. people who do not share the same position i do, understand that even if they don't have the same position, they don't want tax money going to an organization such as planned parenthood. journalist: would you order a shutdown over the planned parenthood shutdown? guest: nobody wants a shutdown. i have never voted for a shutdown. two years ago, we voted to fund the government at the same level the democrats wanted. we simply said delay obamacare. if you treat them one way, treat

all markings the same way. same issue here. we are saying look. we will agree at the levels the president agreed to. republicans and democrats have agreed to. we sibley don't want money going to this organization. if the president says, no, we insist that money goes to this organization after what we have seen, that has no logic. journalist: if republican leaders on capitol hill, as you say, repeat that message over and over. if the democrats any white house say absolutely we need federal funding to planned parenthood and they veto or threatened to veto bills and the government is shutdown, do you think in a situation the public would back republicans in that fight? they have not backed republicans in prior fights.

guest: i don't know. i don't know that you know. we can look at history and i get that. i've seen the polling numbers in the past. i would argue that i don't believe we have made the argument in a compelling and articulate -- and frankly, not enough. that has to happen. i think there is a simple moral question that every member with a conscience -- are you going to allow the tax dollars of the families you get the privilege of serving and representing, are you going to continue to allow those dollars to go to an organization now known to have engaged in what they did? i, personally, cannot do that. i think it is a conscience vote for all numbers. journalist: you admitted after the 2013 shutdown that it was a mistake. you are on the record, actually, saying that in november, 2013 -- why would a shutdown over this issue be different? guest: i don't know that i --

fighting for what is the right way to do things, a consistent way, and application of the rule of law across the board equally for everyone -- i don't think that is a mistake. i think some of the strategies used in the showdown and that debate two years ago were wrong. i don't think it is a mistake to fight for what would the voters were going to fight for. i think we mishandled how to put out. we took several different positions in the course of the debate -- i think we should have had the same position. treat every american the same. if you're going to delay obamacare for your corporate friends, a should apply the same to all americans. journalist: you sit on the benghazi committee -- can you give us an idea of how you think october 22, the to let -- the day that hillary clinton is scheduled to testify, there are reports that it will be a long

day. what is the game plan of the committee on that day? guest: the chairman has been clear. if she is coming once, she has to answer every question we have. he has talked about several rounds. that is what i anticipate. chairman gary will determine all about. i think it will be an important area. the secretary of state one for americans give their lives for their country that night and lots of questions we have to ask her about before. questions like when you had 200 security incidents in a 13 months prior to the attack on september 11, 2012, ied attacks, assassination attempt on the british ambassador. you had all of that going on. you had repeated requests from the folks on the ground for additional security. those were denied -- not only denied, the security presence they had there was reduced -- why was that down? why would you do that? particularly on september 11, particularly in the country, at that time a focus of the at

ministration. -- at -- all that administration. why would you do that? particularly in the after, when this whole idea of a demonstration spontaneously evolving into an attack motivated by a video turned out not to be accurate, where did that come from, why was i given as a narrative to the american people? there are those questions. there are the questions raised in the last several months about the e-mail and the fact that we don't have access to all of the documents from the state department -- first of all, secretary clinton had the documents at her server. she turned them into the state department. she determined which documents from her server went to the state department. there are two steps there. there will be questions on that

as well. journalist: a ranking member on the benghazi section committee today has raised the criticism this is only republicans looking to hurt hillary clinton. they are looking to submarine her 2016 presidential campaign. what is your response to that? how did you feel today when a former clinton staffer took the fifth amendment right before the selection committee? guest: four americans lost their lives. our job as the congress is to seek the truth. for the taxpayers and for the families of the lost individuals. today, a staffer took the fifth amendment. what i would have liked to ask him is who asked you to set up the server? who paid you to set up the server? who used the server?

what kind of access to information did you have access -- what kind of access did you have to information on the server? did you participate in wiping the server clean as we have heard about? those i think are important questions we do not get to ask. the most important western is this. what is the tech guy doing -- the most important question is this -- what is the tech guy doing setting up the server? -- taking the fifth? what criminality could he have if he is just the tech guy? it makes sense. he took the fifth amendment today. i think it is a fundamental question. unfortunately, we do not get to

ask him because he was not quick answer. journalist: why not give a tech guy full immunity? guest: there is talk of that, but that is a call for someone for someone with a lot more experience like chairman gaudie. i am not a lawyer. trey is. that will be a part of the discussion, i'm sure. i know that senator johnson is talking about that. good mines are looking into it. we'll see. host: halfway point. journalist: there will be a debt limit vote at some point, probably this fall. what are your thoughts on that? i know this is an issue you have talked about repeatedly in your time in congress. guest: we have an $18 trillion debt. american people understand we can't spend more than we taken. when you raise the debt ceiling, you should put in place, get certain changes to the law that will put you on the path to fixing the problem. we had a plan a few years back, cap and balance that the american people like. cut spending in the short term, but more important, cap spending as a percentage of our economy as we move forward. perhaps more important, start the process towards getting a balanced budget amendment. those are the things the american people want.

if we are going to raise the debt ceiling, we should make sure we are going to get the changes that put us on the path to balance. i think the american people understand that. any family who has financial problems, they know you cannot fix it overnight, but you have to start fixing it. to just raise it as the democrats seem to want to do, that will not fly. there will have to be some reforms in our long-term spending that begin to put us on that path. journalist: you have been investigating the irs scandal. i wanted to get an update on that and specifically what is going to happen to lois lerner of the house -- they held her in contempt. edc prosecutor who has since step down did not bring charges. could they vote against her again? guest: we could, maybe we should, but what we are mostly looking at is the current commissioner who breached every single duty he had. they allowed 400 and 20 back up cases to be destroyed containing 24,000 e-mails.

it is important for the viewers to understand the timeline. remember how this started. on may 10, the inspector general had already told the irs and treasury there was targeting going on. on may 10, 2013, lois lerner jumped in front of the story so that she can spin it her way. at a staged event, a bar association speech in town, a planted question from one of her friends, she lies. she says it wasn't me, it was in washington, it was those agents in cincinnati. right from the get-go she lies.

12 days later, she comes in front of the oversight committee and takes the fifth. when you have a central figure lying and taking the fifth, it's sort of puts a premium on getting all the document, all of the coming vacation, all of the e-mails, the entire record. the irs with a preservation order in place and all of the doctrine. we issue a subpoena, give us all the document. with a preservation order and a subpoena in place, the irs destroys 422 backup tapes. three weeks later, the commissioner at the irs comes in front of our committee, repeatedly asked if he would give us all of the e-mails, he repeatedly says yes i will. it is a blatant and total lie because you cannot give us your e-mails if you have destroyed 24,000. you think about the duties he had. he had the duty to preserve the documents, produce the documents, disclose them to us, a duty to testify accurately and

to correct the record if he testifies inaccurate. he did not fulfill any of those duties. we think he should be impeached. journalist: is at going to happen? guest: we are pushing for that. i think it will. we are having a lot of discussions. this is not been done in a long time where a head of an agency was impeached. we are doing a homer, but we think it should and is going to happen. journalist: can i stray to present a politics for a moment? donald trump -- what is your take on him and the rise of trump, dr. ben carson? it seems like the republican party -- it is hard to figure out where it is heading right now. what are your thoughts on it? what does it mean for your constituency? what does it mean for ohio? guest: in a general sense, it underscores what we have started talking about. the american people are frustrated with what they seek not getting done and washington,

d.c. you know this. trump's numbers, carson's numbers. you put in mr. cruz's numbers and you are over 50. three of them are not in washington and mr. cruz is antiestablishment. you add all of them together and you are over 50%. that underscores that we better get focused doing what we told the voters what we are going to do. that is the charge of the freedom house mission statement. we think we have forgotten them, our job is to remember and fight for them. we had better do that. frankly, in the good republican field, and it is a good field, weber emerges as our nominee will be the one who demonstrates

to the american people he is coming here to fight for them. not for the corporate interests, not for the big corporations that cozy up to big government and get a special deal and corporate welfare -- he is here to fight for regular families, middle-class families. the candidate who can best articulate that will be the nominee. i think that will give us a great chance of beating secretary clinton or mr. biden or whoever they happen to nominate on their side. journalist: will you endorse anybody in never public and primary? what about john kasich? guest: i am for the republicans. i chief of staff told us a while back that in 1996 there was a guiding more retailer who ran for president. he finished eighth. morry tailor. today, the person in a is ron paul -- rand paul, bobby jindal.

that shows you the depth of our field. we have a good field. sometimes, in a semi final match, every match is just as tough as the finals. we will slug it out here in the finals, but whoever here is the winner will be a good candidate and give us a good chance to win the right house. journalist: on your public inside, the voters are extraordinarily angry. he spoke about this. that is the mission of the freedom caucas is to respond to the public discomfort with washington. it seems like the discomfort of the establishment which you are a part of -- guest: wait, wait, wait --

did you say i'm part of the establishment? [laughter] journalist: respect for the, sir, you are in your fifth term in congress. you are part of the establishment. guest: the guy who is the head of the freedom caucus is part of the establishment. that is a first. journalist: it seems like there has been something unleashed that the establishment has a hard time grasping or putting their arms around or even understanding. they are scratching their heads. they look at jeb bush, son of a president, brother of another president. he is at 3% in some of these polls. it seems like the old republic the whole republican hierarchy is upside down. do you feel that way? guest: you can say the same thing on the democrat side. we have a socialist winning new hampshire or iowa. that is a believable. it is a frustration from all americans that this game is rigged against them. they focus way too much on corporate interest. that is why the xm bank has been such a big fight. i would argue, but for the work of the freedom house caucus --

that thing might have already been reauthorized. we are here two months passed before it was posted authorized. the question is it is an entirely in question to restart some thing and resurrect some thing. we are sensitive to that and a big way. we have been pushing on it. i think it is on both sides. they are tired of this game where the politicians and big government get close with the big corporations and the game gets rained against small business owners and families across the country. that is what our organization, the freedom caucus, is all about. host: three minutes. journalist: obamacare, replace and repeal. we have been hearing that from republicans for years. there have been some proposals overall, but overall, they have not gone behind one. what has been the delay? guest: that is what we were frankly told by our leadership we were going to do. one of the reasons many of us are willing to vote for the budget proposals initially is because we are going to get to

obamacare and reconciliation. the message we hear from our leadership as we will do that. that is what we should do because that is what we told the voters we were going to do. journalist: what is your own long-term plans for your political career? how long do you see yourself in congress? guest: coming to this cspan show and talking with you guys as often as possible. [laughter] my focus is serving the families of the fourth district. i enjoy the opportunity and count it as a privileged to represent small business owners, taxpayers, moms and dads in ohio. it is a great district. we are the part of ohio -- the old line about ohio, they make things and grow things.

that is what we do in the fourth district. big manufacturing, the start of the ag-belt movement across the country. my focus is on representing them. journalist: one more question. we talk to hamas min mark meadowsessman mark about who should be the next is, he, whenever that said it could be a freedom caucus member, but it could be a member of leadership. who do you think? guest: i have not focused on a. i'm focused on what we had talked about. making sure the government gets funded at the right level, not increasing spending, making sure that an organization caught on videotape doing what they are doing doesn't get your tax

dollars. making sure we can do the best possible thing on this around deal and carry the day on that. stopping the corporate welfare we talked about. those are the things i'm focused on. those leadership things -- they work themselves out. host: we are out of time. for the record, c-span is happy to have you and you come back. thank you for being here. let's stay on this leadership. what i thought i heard was getting into a replacement of speaker boehner right now takes the focus off of all of the big agenda items. it sounds like even know he has numbers pushing for this, he is counseling, but get to this month. journalist: it is a big test for the speaker. that is what a lot of conservatives in the house are looking at. it does not look like anyone will move forward which would be an embarrassing motion to get rid of the speaker until we see what happens with planned parenthood and government funding. if it is not to their liking, and democrat have the upper hand. republicans do not have since the vote in the senate and they have a democratic president. we have seen these fiscal fight before. democrats win them. that could be quite interesting. host: he is the person who invited the pope to visit, and

that is not for a couple of weeks. that would be a major embarrassment. journalist: i do not think they would care, to be honest. i did not hear the same way. i thought it was -- i think jordan and john boehner are ok. i do not think they're close, but i think that boehner is on a short leash. if boehner forces their hand, you will see a resolution,. they are holding it over boehner's had right now. at some point, he will have to slug it out with them or not. what he has to do as speaker drives these guys crazy. these guys crazy. he has to govern, which means compromise. these guys don't like optimize.

compromise. in the end, that is not where they are. he is caught in a trap right here. i think we will see this resolution again at some point. i think it could come before the end of the month. it could come at any time. i think there will be a vote on boehner remaining speaker. we will see the votes he has, i think there will be a vote on it. journalist: i think there is so much unrest with boehner right now, all it takes is one member to do this. all it takes is one number in

the house and then they can vote on this. jordan is in a tough spot. boehner is an ohio calling. they have a tough relationship. basically, a lot of people are saying it may not be in -- about this vote in particular because boehner can probably survive it. it is about pushing him out the door. host: i want to talk about the funding of government and plan to issue -- planned parenthood issue. you asked him so many times about whether he would risk a government shutdown on it. journalist: until this week, i do not think there would be a government shutdown on this. i did not think that was possible. watching what happened over the around issue and how quickly -- over the around issue and how quickly they turned on the leadership. they threw it out the window. the leadership has so little juice. how's relevant leaders -- house republican leaders -- i think they can blunder the way into a shutdown. for the first time, i think when the speaker of the house says our goal is not to shut down the government -- we had a conversation. it was 2013. i think it is out there. do i think it will happen? no. these guys will not give on this issue.

how many votes? i don't know. what boehner will do-- and will that trigger his removal of speaker? the dynamic right now is interesting. journalist: conservatives like jim jordan said are not going to stand for any cr that has federal funding. they will make a lot of noise. it is a tough position for house and senate republicans. you had the around vote -- the iran vote postponed. it has been a fiasco. it will only get worse. as jim jordan was noting, they didn't windows battles on shutdowns. he was making the case that we can win the argument, we just have to make it this way. journalist: better tactics. journalist: that is right. journalist: an interesting take on 2013. journalist: we will see, but it will be a rough few months. host: what an interesting thing we have to watch.

thank you for being here this week. journalist: thank you having us. >> on the next washington journal, william hoagland looks at the process for continuing sequester cuts. discusses theky recent buildup of russian military in syria. thedavid martin talks about federal agencies involved in the resettlement of 70,000 refugees coming to the united states. as always, we will take your calls. washington journal, live at 7:00 a.m. et on c-span. a look atw, operations on the international space station with astronauts mark and scott kelly. the twin brothers are part of an

ongoing study in space travel. with one serving aboard the international space station for one year and the other working here on earth. c-span3, wetime, on will have a discussion on the upcoming elections in taiwan. the brookings institution and the center for strategic and international studies is hosting the event with political science professors and policy experts. that is at nine clock a.m. et -- 9:00 a.m. et. >> all persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the united states are admonished to give their attention. 9, the petitioner versus [indiscernible] roe against wade. >> it is probably the most famous case this court ever

decided. voted againstet people here on land where slavery was not recognized. >> the president -- presence of federal troops and marksman, and of the courage of children. >> we wanted to pick cases that changed the direction and import of the court, and then changed society -- and that changed society. them and had to have a section. she meant -- demanded to see it. she grabbed it out of his hands. a better waymagine to bring the constitution to life than by telling the human

stories behind great supreme court cases. boldly opposed the forced internment of japanese americans during world war ii. after being convicted for failing to report for relocation, mr. kormantsu took his case all the way before the supreme court. the ones we were member other ones the court took that were quite unpopular. >> if you had to pick one freedom that was the most essential to the functioning of the democracy, it has to be freedom of speech. >> let's go through a few cases that illustrate dramatically and visually, what it means to live in a society of 310 million different people, who help stick together because they believe in a rule of law. >>