washington journal. tomorrow morning we will be talking about health care in the trump administration with stephanie armour and amy goldstein. we will also talk about the future of medicare and medicaid with tom scully. and the former administration of the health care finance and administration. we will see you then. ♪ ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] ♪ >> here on c-span, newsmakers is next with democratic congressman john yarmuth of kentucky. then the group no labels takes a

look at expectations for the first 100 days of the trump presidency. later, republican members of congress discuss how they plan to work with a trump administration to address environmental issues and policy. host: joining us is representative john yarmuth who will serve as the ranking member of the budget committee in congress. welcome. guest: good to be with you. host: joining me, a congressional reporter and senior budget report appeared to both of you, welcome. bill: congress next year will be controlled in the senate by republicans and in the house by republicans. committee, what

are the mechanisms you can use to be relevant? n: we do not have a lot of tools readily deployed -- deployable. a divided republican party. to pass many things pass, they want to will need to find 218 votes. they have had trouble doing that . a conservative element of the party sometimes votes in what they wantt to do. the dynamic is something they want to exploit -- we want to display when we feel it is necessary. that, we basically have the opportunity to raise the kind of contrast so the public understands the choices republicans are making in the

majority. the senate is a whole different ballgame and they have different procedures. the 59 democrats, depending on what happens in louisiana, can affect the agenda significantly. just by numbers. we can't outvote republicans on anything in the house, if they decide to vote as a party. they sometimes do not do that. is there any since you have that perhaps they will be more unified under a president trump, given that even the physical conservatives -- fiscal conservatives know he has all of the distress? is so muchh: there uncertainty heading into the next congress. no one knows exactly what the trump agenda will be. he has taken multiple positions on the same issue already.

membersppointed cabinet who have held positions diametrically opposed to what he said on the campaign trail. have talked to i are basically saying, we do not know what is coming at us. we may end up with four different interests in congress next year. we have the trump agenda, conventional republicans, mainstream republicans, the freedom caucus agenda, and then the democrats. if that is the way it works out, that is a recipe for compromise and coalition building. maybe something good could get done. partisan comes down to votes, than we lose. paul: republicans are planning

as their first major action next fiscal 2017e a budget resolution that would to repealstructions the affordable care act or obamacare. you will be the ranking member of the budget committee. what will your response to the action be? rep. yarmuth: the main thing we is try on the committee and make sure the american people understand the ramifications of repealing the affordable care act. a lot of people say there are 20 million people who lose coverage. that is a serious consequence of repealing the act. there are consequences to the 150 million americans who get insurance through their employer. there are repercussions for medicaid beneficiaries. it does not just affect 20 money

people, but virtually every american. not a positive way. that is our responsibility to make sure the american people understand that. talking about what republicans might do and whether they can coalesced,with some they are having a problem figuring out whether they want to just repeal the affordable care act and say they will replace it with something three years down the road, or whether they want to come up with a replacement plan at the same time and repeal it. there are no consensus is -- there is not a consensus with the timing of what they want to do. if they are going to repeal the affordable care act or the lions share of it in january or early february, we will make sure the american people understand the costs they will pay for the action. at theoking

consequences, it is like saying we want you to move out of your house that you are comfortable and but it needs a few repairs, and we will give you a house two or three years down the road that may be better or worse, but we will not tell you. most everybody who looks at the scenario understand if you repeal the affordable care act with nothing to replace it with, you have created chaos and insurance companies will react in their best interests, to withdraw from the market because they do not know what is coming at them in the wake of repeal. they will get risk, particularly with regard to insurance policies they felt through the various exchanges under the affordable care act. it will be a disruptive thing. thing.say another i know we will probably get in a little more detail.

repealing the affordable care act will not be nearly as easy as they think. a number ofto people recently. when we put the affordable care act together in 2009 and 2010, there were 7500 lobbyists in washington trying to affect the bill in some way. those lobbyists have not disappeared from the earth. they still exist. talk about taking revenue streams away from hospitals and insurance companies and equipment it, youurers, you name will get a lot of resistance. earlier this week, the american -- american hospital association chimed in, that this may have adverse consequences for us, same with the insurance lobby. there will be a lot of pressure on them to not repeal it without telling people, and for them to

have a say in what is coming afterward. it is true there is a lot of uncertainty associated with repeal. assuming they do repeal the law, republican leaders are saying it would take two or three years to transition to a new system, and they would like a smooth transition. are talking about putting together a replacement in the form of probably perhaps several bills. , when they to you is start working on a replacement, do you expect fellow democrats will work with him on that replacement? or will you oppose it? rep. yarmuth: i think it is too early to tell. this is as far-fetched as you could get.

replacing it with medicare for everybody, and we will figure out how to do that, we would be right with them. if they come up with a plan that the kind chairman of the budget committee nominee to be secretary of health and human i think we would uniformly oppose that plan because that does not do anything except benefit wealthy americans. a loss ofsult in coverage for tens of millions of americans, reduce coverage for virtually everyone else, a return to the days when insurance companies decided who lived and died, 800,000 bankruptcies per year, all of the protections that are in the affordable care act will disappear under tom price's plan. if that is the plan they come up with, you will find every democrat as opposed to that.

>> in the category of may be biting off more than they can against some of the concerns of their own numbers, talk about medicare reform once has not gone well for them in the past elections, do think the speaker is genuinely intent on doing that right away as well? as well as obamacare? rep. yarmuth: several of our leaders have said, make my day. if he tries to do that, it will not only result in an incredible backlash from the american people, but also will undermine change thes two affordable care act. medicare is one of the most popular programs in the united states. the polls show it has close to 80% approval. seniors desperately rely on it. it has been an established program now for more than 50 years.

just do noting you mess with. it is the third rail of american politics. , the plannts to do is has been out there for about six years now, maybe longer, he wants to give every senior a voucher, some kind of credit, last i heard between 5500 and $6,000, and say go out and buy private insurance. we spend about $12,000 on every medicare benefit this year. will provide on his plan will cover less than half of what the cost of the insurance will be. upiors will have to come with another 6, 7, $8,000 per year to pay for their health care, plus, going into a system ofre they are at the mercy insurance companies, a lot of people have had to fight insurance companies to get the care they need.

seniors will react very negatively. plan.s the >> given that almost everyone agrees entitlements have to be what is it exactly that democrats are offering in terms of getting a ring on the medical costs? the first things we did in 2007 in a majority was true repeal the prohibition in that case the government through medicare from negotiating entre rices and the pharmaceutical companies, as the veteran -- veterans administration does, and it saves a lot of money. it is ironically republicans keep screaming about

unsustainability of medicare and they refuse to do the one thing that would demonstrably save a lot of money, letting the government negotiate with the drug companies. that is number one. i talk about medicare for everybody, if you did extend medicare to everyone, you would have a much healthier population , spreading the cost over the entire population, and medicare would be much more sustainable. another thing people do not think about that would help medicare is if we passed comprehensive immigration reform. then we would have millions of young people not using the system but would be paying the medicare tax into the system. they would not be using benefits for the most part for 30 years or so. that is another thing we could do to really help shore up medicare and social security. he will service incoming

budget ranking member. and paul krawzak joining us. paul: president-elect trump has announced he will nominate tom price, the chairman of the house budget committee, as his health and human services secretary. withave probably worked price more than most democrats on the budget committee. choicethink he is a good or a bad choice? for secretary. and if so, why. i think i could come up with a better nominee given some time. a very nice man, a gentleman, he is thoughtful, but he has a perspective on the health care system that i just with modern in tune health care delivery system and reimbursement system.

physician, and my experience with physicians and health care is they are great at providing care but in terms of having overall perspective on the entire health care system, which again is 18% of the entire economy, the perspective is so myopic that they really have a hard time dealing with the big and matra -- macro picture. that is what he would have to do a secretary. again, i think his perspective youseful and important, but need a much broader perspective to come up with the kind of health care system that will satisfy the most people and provide the most access to the most quality care at the most quality cost. so i think we can come up with someone better. that being said, i have no questions about tom's integrity, his character, and his thoughtfulness. i just think his perspective is a little limited.

>> is it fair to say you would oppose his nomination -- nomination, or are you not going that far? rep. yarmuth: i don't get a vote on it. it really does not matter. i think if i were in the senate id i had a vote on it, unless were convinced through the confirmation hearings that he had the kind of broader perspective i think is necessary, then i would probably oppose him. >> some the house you do not get a vote on but i want to hear your opinion, is a resurgence of talk that the president-elect is considering your fellow budget committee member nick --mick mulvaney. he is a founding member of the house freedom caucus. how does that apply to you? rep. yarmuth: he is a good friend of mine. he is somebody i would say has the utmost integrity and character and he is a very smart

guy. i disagree with him on virtually everything, except we both love golf. i think as budget director, the thing that would concern me the most, and in fairness, he asked me to put in some good words for him with the transition team, but, i think the world of him, but the one problem i would have with him is i know when the government was shut down a few years ago, he was one who said it is ok to shut the government down. i think as budget director, that is not the kind of perspective we ought to have. , would like to hear him say one of the objectives of the avoid director is to shutting down the government and avoid default thing on the

national debt and doing the things that will provide the most stability and will make the necessary investments in the country. he comes to it with a philosophical ideology that i think might be limiting in that role. a quick follow-up. in giving your opinion on him to the transition team, did you get feedback? rep. yarmuth: no. address, somemail kind of vip email adjust that they were encouraging people to have references right in. i just wrote into that email tress. >> president-elect trump has fallen for -- called for lifting the spending cap. the current caps last through

2000 21, the caps on defense and nondefense -- nondefense spending. there is increasing talk of doing another budget deal next year and may be completely rewriting or even repealing the budget control act. the question i would like to ask you is, in the past, democrats -- defenseed if this spending increases, nondefense spending has to increase. guess,ou consider, i changing that requirement, and maybe going in with the attitude increase defense spending more than nondefense spending as part of it -- a budget deal or rewrite the budget control act? rep. yarmuth: personally, i really do not like the kinds of deals that were made in the budget control act. i do not like things that limit the of hardy of the congress to make the kinds of decisions it needs to make.

if the first responsibly of congress is to defend the united states of america, if the experts, the security and intelligence experts, the people of the pentagon, decide we need more money and they can make the case as to why, and they can explain away the $125 billion that were wasted in over five years that just became public, and assure the congress that that will not continue, i do not have any problem doing what is necessary to secure the country. it -- that it needs to be one for one, i think that is kind of silly. way, it relieves us of some of our responsibility. i don't think that is useful. if you have hand, strict parameters in the law, these limits, and we want to fight for our priorities as

well, the kind of case i am talking about i do not think has that wee to congress, need significantly more defense spending and we do not need any more domestic spending. automaticof any cap's, and those types of things. i voted against the sequestration program when it came up back in 2011. is our responsibility, to make those hard decisions. when you create these artificial limits and caps, i think that keeps us from making the kinds of thoughtful and intelligent decisions we should be making. to follow up, if republicans want to change the sequestration law next year, they will need democratic cooperation at least from the senate. are you enthusiastic about working with republicans to change the law? rep. yarmuth: well i sat through

i think seven hearings this fall ont chairman price held reforming the budgetary process. one concern we expressed every are open tot we discussing any kind of procedural reform that makes the process better. that chairman price casesed in almost every seemed to predetermined or cut domestic spending and no limits on defense spending, and prohibited any increase in revenue. if you will create a process that is -- that guarantees there the social safety net programs and -- investment in education and infrastructure in -- infrastructure and our veterans, you will put up a that, ithat aaron t is

certainly cannot support that and most democrats in the house and the senate would oppose that. >> real quick, on some of the items being floated around that republicans may take up, in the previous congresses, the most recent ones, they have always had a backstop for some of the things they voted for, a democratic president who would veto them. are you hearing from any on the other side that may be moderate, a little hesitancy for such things including planned parenthood, d funding, obamacare, a repeals bill, because it might actually get signed this time? rep. yarmuth: i think the general point you make is one that i am hearing on a daily if not hourly basis in washington

from republicans. own everything they do and now it is for real and the votes are not just symbolic. they are going to affect people. you you start doing that, are putting yourself at serious political risk and they know it. again, it is one of those things, with the uncertainty of the trump agenda, it it will cause them fits. they are very much aware of it, at least, i think the republicans who have been there longer who have had to negotiate before and have had to compromise before, true legislators, because really over the last six years, as you mentioned, none of the items the , 65 or sos passed attempts to repeal the affordable care act, and all the attempts to undermine the environmental protection agency and the clear -- clean air act, all of the things that were

wonderful red meat for the base, those things now take on a different complexion. the saner people understand that very well. >> before we let you go, have you heard any talk on who will replace tom price as budget chairman? rep. yarmuth: i've heard there are four different people interested. bob, the second ranking tomblican to tom price, from california, diane black from tennessee, and build from texas. those are the four i hear have interest in the position. have asked a couple of republicans what they thought, and they said it is hard to separate those four but they think probably todd and diane would have the best chance of those four. but i know nothing. i'm just relying on what republicans tell me. we know our guest will

serve as the republican committee ranking member. joining us for our newsmaker program, thank you for your time. rep. yarmuth: my pleasure. thank you for having me on. host: we will continue, said with billy house and paul krawzak. what did you hear about what he talked about with facing democrats now, especially with republican congress and donald trump as president, especially when it comes to public matters? democrats are ready to oppose what republicans offer. certainly oppose the repeal to the affordable care act. like, if they are going to try and replace the affordable care act with the tom price plan, we will be against that. it sounds like democrats will be against much of what republicans will propose to replace obamacare.

another point he made which is true is there is a lot of whattainty about exactly donald trump's policies will be, and whether trump and republicans will be able to agree on policy. a keywordcertainty is looking ahead to next year. billy: i think that is absolutely correct and i think congress is correct that in a sense, their best strategy is not any legislative mechanism or tool, but to create mischief on the other side and to some degree hope that speaker ryan will be punching jell-o with his problems and trying to satisfy moderates and satisfy the spending hawks at the same time enough to get 218 votes. that really seems to be an iffy situation now. there are no details and a lot we areaspects, where hearing about how mr. trump

wants to make america great again. triedeaker has obviously to whittle down the discussion points at this point to narrow topics. but will not talk about details yet himself, saying those are being decided in talks. are awaiting the details on the broader issues of medicare reform. they are ready to go to work and hit the public with events all over the country. republicans themselves do not know what is in these proposals. it was interesting ito, the discussion of hhs, will be interesting how they respond to him, being a member how theyss, he knows operate, i suppose that will be an advantage for democrats as well. >> it is interesting, they are friends.

but they play an important game and they played it for a long time. they are ready with the punches they expect from each other. quite a few talk about the defense bill and they are working together, what did you in thisout the future next congress when it comes to defense spending? >> it was interesting that he said he did not subscribe to the of any defense increase has to have an equal and nondefense increased. i thought that was interesting. with a republican president, i think republicans will be in the drivers she -- drivers seat and it will be harder for democrats. democrats will not have a democratic president.

i think democrats will have to compromise a little more on this. the interesting thing is, in order to change the sequestration law, in order to raise the defense and nondefense spending, republicans will need democratic corporation for that. they will need 60 votes in the senate. is true of most of what republicans will want to do. most of what they will want to do, they will need democrats in the senate and the house as well. >> one thing discussed when paul ryan became a house speaker was the process of budget making. someu think some kind -- type of that will come into congress? theythink we will be told will be working in regular order every time they do something. we have seen already that regular order can go by the when things need to be done a different way.