burgess talk about congress in the first year of the trump administration. they also talk about border issues and hurricane relief. this is one hour. >> welcome to our planner at the texas tribune fest. we are honored to have two men who are alumni and i am also alumni. on my immediate left is congressman henry cuellar, who is from laredo. he is been serving in congress since 2004 and one of the reasons i'm excited to have him here is he is an appropriate or witches inside washington jargon

for helping decide how we made our money. if there's anything i would fault in the aftermath of harvey, five most important of congress and our status john cornyn and before four appropriators. this is a bipartisan effort. he will be leading the craddick effort from the state of texas to get as much funding as possible. elected 2002 is john cornyn. the most important texan from congress on the issue. i once asked if he was the quarterback of the effort for tax reform and he said he was the water boy. i can tell you i followed these guys around the capitol. i annoy them, i asked them questions. they very much believe in issues, they work hard. i am honored to have them here talking about their lives in

congress. [applause] sadll start this off with a anecdote about my life as a reporter in washington. everythinghe energy, changed at 12 p.m. january 20 was when donald trump inaugurated as president. from then on, weekend, night, early morning, you never know when he would comment it can be on my toes. at the peak of the health-care debate and february, i ended up resorting to using my wine classes to drink coffee because i did not even have time to wash dishes. that is emblematic of washington. i want each member to talk about how things have changed, how you have adjusted. or you tired?

are you excited? how do you feel about this new era? >> thank you abby. i am an adopter. indeed, very good that health care. a newtime there is president, there's always a new realm. a new congress, new president. a difference in how we do our work. president george bush a certain rhythm, president obama, a sort this is veryt different. definitely very different simply because everything, a lot of the traditional norms that we have our change. i mean, how many prisons to have that are tweeting? how many are able to basically have the media members of congress and others fellows

follow what he does. changing at a very faster pace because it is not the tame work under a traditional administration. it is different. it looks like there is the lot more antipathy. it is faster. i have talked to reporters, members of congress, it has a faster pace because of what he does with his thumbs. the congressess in in many ways most of the issues we're working on, we are of doing the same thing. i said in the appropriations it is very par partisan work. committee. decisions made by the appropriators, i think indiscernible] -- at one level you got the

presidential current. congress in many ways, in many ways, not all, but at least an hour committee it is the same type of work we are doing but unfortunately certain items come in. for example, the president once a wall. the republican majority is in many ways following him on that but in many ways it is a rhythm that we have not seen before. >> what do you think? >> well, when i came in right after the midterm election in 2002 the bush administration was already there and established and had gone through the transition. i did see with president obama coming in, the transition meant things were different for us but henry is correct. there is a certain rhythm to the congressional year and after you pick up on it, some things become predictable. so you're going to have the swearing-in or if it is not an

election year, the first congress of the year that convenience, the state of the union is given, the president lays out the priorities shortly after that. the president's budget is it is. the house produce a budget, the senate produces a budget. to work on appropriations which we do through the summer months and by september 30, it is all wrapped up and we finish the balance of the year on the items that did not conduct. now, that is in theory. been several years. we talked about president trumping the disruptor but here for the first time in the first year, the new administration of president trump, the congress, the house has passed all 12 appropriation bills before the end of the fiscal year. that has not happened since 2006, 2 thousand seven. so it has been, even though he

is a disruptor and thinks are different under his watch, actually the house got its work done. now, the senate is lagging behind as they typically do. it is hard to vote for an appropriateness bill because he they always spend too much money are not enough said there is always reasons for an appropriations bill but i am hopeful that the house setting the standard or re-setting this standard in the age of trial, the senate is going to understand if we are going to do the people's business we have to correctly spend the people's money and allow the appropriators to go through their -- you went through how many subcommittee hearings or full committee hearings and that we didn't all through committee. on the house floor. we worked until late into the night. and that is the way it is supposed to be. that is way be some are supposed to be spent. i'm an authorizer, henry is an

appropriator, the difference between the tunes are you know -- i tried to take at least one trip every term. -- is a beautiful campus, big beautiful building. and they all named for appropriators. i have never been in a building that is named for an authorizer. so that is the difference. we do the work. we have the hearings. we decide. and then henry comes in and writes the check at the last minute think it's all the credit. >> on the appropriators, this is off i for topic, but i used to cover politics. the senator is now to tc's two was the most powerful appropriate ever, robert byrd. everywhere you go there is a robert word building, bridge, tunnel. there is no underestimation up that power. thegoing to ask you, at beginning of this administration, continuing on, a

lot of particularly republicans have avoided townhouse. you jumped in town halls right off the bat. you went on ms nbc and did not peoplef facing back challenging you. not many members of congress are comfortable doing that. what is your mindset of that? you. >> that's part of our obligation to our constituents it's just one of the ways of communicating with constituents. i've always found it interesting, not always helpful but certainly educational. the years that i voted for the debt limited 2011 was hard doing town halls, people were very angry people on the right were angry, you gave president obama everything he wanted and he didn't get a thing for it. now, we actually were able to

bend the spending curb on spending a little bit. i look back and say maybe it wasn't all that bad. but it doesn't matter what the issues. if you're doing a general town hall and people get it they say the congress minister in the town hall tonight, now almost everything is doing i'm good, i don't need to go. but if you're mad maybe are there and you come to talk about the things. spence typically what i hear weather on the right or left. that's just been something that's part of the congressional year. we have an obligation to hear from our folks. i will say this august the town halls, i don't ever require that there be a police department there, but we always tell her

communities what were doing. will be in your community this weekend, were doing a town hall. maybe it's because of the shooting at the baseball practice, the police presence at the last two town hall i've never seen anything quite like it. normally you have one or two uniformed officers standing at the back of the room. and that's enough and sufficient for people to be polite. right after gabriel gifford was injured in front of a low-power congressional events in a park in the come i had one of the police departments ask if they could set up a magnetometer a. i said he really can ask people to go through that. they were good, they backed off, but the summer the number of law enforcement there, the plane close one that were there, to me it was startling, that it has

become that hard for me to go and interact with constituents. >> that's something i have not thought of. in mid-june, i was supporting on the senate side and i turn to a friend and i said, something is in the air and it's bad. i don't feel good being here. two days later, i plan a women's up waltzing is reporters versus female members of congress, the day before i went to the female practice to scout them, and i'm at mile practice the next day and carl's famous congressional reporter and he said practice is over, there has been a shooting. a going to the dugout and she said steve scalise has been shot. i went to the shooting scene and baseball cleats. all i can think about is what if they were for the women yesterday. there's no dugout.

kevin brady who is that -- pointed out to me that if the picture that day had not been given the day off to rest, they would been trapped in the bullpen right by the shooter. it's none real story, i think it into politics to cover this kind of thing. i'm supposed to cover the best of america, are you afraid of your safety? >> certainly there is a new sense of lack of stability out there. in so many ways people come and i'm talking about emily constituents but you have members the way they talk to certain folks, there's just no sense of civility anymore. i grew up for my parents, you treat everybody the way you want to be treated. there's just no sense of stability out there and --

civility out there. i sitting congress and communities. but to go around with security like the administration does? we don't do that. were out there, but there's a very different environment out there. >> i go on the republican side to see how the lines are working. again, every situation is different. i cannot say from a security standpoint that is something i spent a lot of time worrying about. et cetera knows, the average

member in congress doesn't have security detail. it was only because steve scalise was at that practice that there is actually someone who is there to return fire. had he not been there that morning and what a tragedy, he was the one that got severely injured. but without him being there it would have been significantly worse. >> i want to get to a couple of issues. most on the radar right now which i don't if i don't get to initiate care about, understand that's my life every day. there's an issue i think i'm gonna write about the world changes an hour later. but where are we on health care? and where we going? >> next question. >> you're asking me to predict the future where the senates involved, it's hard to do. i would have predicted that we

would have been past this point many months ago, i will admit that it was harder on the house side than i thought it would be. remember that the house had passed under senate reconciliation rules had passed the major pieces of repeal bill in december 2015. president obama vetoed that repeal bill. our statement to his veto was okay, if we get the white house that's what we will do. when i met with my counterparts at the statehouse and state senate in december 2016, i look said look at the bill we passed a year ago and that is likely going to be what we will be doing. now, that didn't happen and there are people who are concerned that if we passed a

bill that was a repeal, that reconciliation individual mandate got rid of most of the taxes of the obama care subsidies the medicare expansion in two years time. there were people, moderates and conservatives in the president himself tweeted out that you're going to have to do some replace along with repeal, cannot be a repeal only bill. i know we don't get credit for but we did several hearings and the subcommittee on health. >> and they would like 18 hours. >> those hearings did not because nobody wanted -- they just became slug fest on obama care is bad what you're doing is worse. the fact that hearings are continuous because they weren't productive. we produced a bill based on 2015

reconciliation. not like it hadn't been through that on the house side, it had been through regular committee process. the changes that were made were made to add more replace elements to the base of repeal. we marked it up in an open fashion. amendments were not limited, votes were not limited. we went for 28 hours throughout the day. we read the bill to work. some people say we didn't even read the bill. in fact, we did. we rented in committee. the clerks read the bill and off they went. then to follow that, we had 18 hours on the rules committee. that bill came there. eighteen hours of debate. minority leader pelosi and hoyer

came in for three hours talked about how great the affordable care act was but it wasn't an open process in the past. nevertheless, people forget that the time invested in this on the house side was significant. we had to go back to rules to additional time stat amendments were people said were knocking about four because it doesn't have this or that, it was pulled from the floor and house which i thought was a mistake. the rules committee had already provided same day authority which meant we could've stayed through the weekend until we got it done. we went home instead. thirty-four weeks later it did pass and went over to the senate plenty of time for them to get

it done before the memorial day recess which is what they said they wanted to do. they had plenty of time to do it before the fourth of july resource but they didn't. plenty of time before the august recess and it turns out they weren't ready. the bill as it has changed, the graham cassidy bell, what i have tried to get my staff to do is prepare, we don't know completely what the bill is, but try to prepare a side-by-side for members of the house, you know what you voted for in may, the said things that saying these are different so people will be able to work to the process, is it something i can support or not. the house will not have a great deal of time. the senate if it does what will be midweek or later.

the senate parliamentarian has said this must happen by the 30th at midnight. the house could vote on it the following week, but i think everyone is anxious if the senate passes to get it evaluated. >> congressman, dear considered one of the democrats was most approachable to republicans. did you ever think of supporting the healthcare legislation that came to the house? >> no. on bipartisan but i'm not going to vote on a piece of legislation that i think does harm. i voted for healthcare law some years ago. it was not a perfect bill, but i know when you pass a piece of legislation you always come back and fine-tune the things that work and don't work.

the problem was, to be fair and both sides the democrats when we are in power they didn't want to make changes with acted like it was a perfect bill. then the republicans wanted to repeal the whole thing. so we had to extremes and nobody it to sit down and talk and see what works and what doesn't work, you either modified or change it. then of course republicans committed and they control the white house and senate so they go back and go to a replace something. the replacement my thing is if you're going to go for one with all due respect and you're gonna knock out the different proposals when they saw it come out with the numbers but if you get a not count 16 or

32 million, were living in two different worlds. with all due respect. if you're gonna focus on premiums but not going to find a way to lower the premiums then you're not doing the job. the piece of legislation is one that will knock out millions of individuals for healthcare have you thought about that, vote for that. second of all, there is some feel-good language that says pre-existing clause says these conditions are not going to be affected. but then you leave it up to the states to decide and with all due respect, you get a state like texas you know it's going

to happen though get rid of some of those placentas mental and maternal care under this piece of legislation. if you feel congress if the states that are doing obama care lose and the states that are anti- trauma care had no state insurance program are benefited by getting billions of dollars. basically what you're saying is congress can't do it so they put a short limit where they put up the exchange plan. so they set up a different thing same in 2027 money will be gone, now, will congress appropriate

that money, we know what happens so again, my thing has been and i am a democrat but i believe we have to work in a bipartisan way. at the beginning of the year he's to be the chief of staff but he's now the white house legislator and says we want to see if there's anything we can back in february says except for healthcare we can talk about taxes, transportation and other items except for healthcare. now, a couple weeks ago when the president asked for republicans to sit down there are blue dogs but there's a couple of republicans. . .

>> >> they don't want to sit down and work thing now.

that is the bottom line. >> we will move on but with health care. >> first off if your insurance is so bad he will not buy it unless you have the threat of the federal government breathing down your neck, is it a good product? are you being well served by the people better offering of product and are you getting good value? there is the problem. my personal feeling is the individual mandate with the centerpiece of the affordable care act fundamentally realtors the relationship between the government and the governed the mattis will be jettisoned. now with the cbo to repeal that individual mandate?

there would still have this sense they cannot use it but they are functionally the insured so to talk about people in the individual market so may i point out previously before the affordable care act came down the pike that you are covered with a pre-existing conditions but in the individual market yes you pay a higher premium but the premium that you paid was lower than the premium that you paid now with obamacare.

and kelly hancock is a state senator reorder the risk pools in the states of texas right now nobody is enrolled there is no money but if that was available they could be up and running in a short period of time. so yes texas would benefit. there would be the equalization of the dollars available. those states that expanded medicaid with a state like texas. there has to be away to even things out. that is one of the main sticking points had to handle a state that expanded

mandate -- medicated those that didn't i of members from virginia they work very hard with a democratic governor who wanted to experience that and said we will not do that. and to check that expansion you have members from new jersey and they are concerned and what is in during. not just disable them pregnant women with that medicaid expansion with a federal match but after two

years they could still be enrolled. after the time is up a can stay as long as they say. but for whatever reason with employer sponsored insurance or they lose eligibility they cannot come back on. and to do so at the federal standard maximum rate. so texas is fixing to lose a lot of money that will delay october 1st for go we will

follow the of resolution. but with all due respect that was when henry waxman was chairman. i went to the floor of the house to make that announcement. it was fruitless if you can walk anything in all to say it is not a bipartisan. don't blame the president. played your of leadership

because they carry the lion's share of this responsibility. >> a couple of things. eighteen hours of hearings with no witnesses, no associations from hospitals or nurses or doctors or advocates or cancer. >> no, no, no. >> i'll let you speak. no testimony from anybody. eighteen hours to deal. day you think that is the appropriate? in dealing in 18 hours? and with those

individuals is that something to say we did a good job as members of congress? a thing that is wrong if you take away the preexisting conditions i think it is wrong. and at the end of the mandate talked to the heritage foundation one of the most republican groups out there. now they are running away. so why can we not sit down to allow witnesses and the advocates to give input? there is a legitimate group

is supporting legislation. there is none out there. with a cancer advocates. what happened to the of bipartisanship? people are talking to each other. >> and now we move on. so to be downstairs in the greenroom. i take that back. excuse me. and then to have a collegial

relationship. every thursday the republicans meet in the of this powerful voting bloc? it is the largest republican state in the house. and things can die over that if you take a lot of pride to be unified something happened after harvey. and then another one the next week. saying that nobody can remember the last five that haven't. >> i called joe tuesday to sit down at say delegation

this is my first time in 12 years to be in the texas chair of the democrats and is there hope we do more. we have nominated a task force on harvey so we can work with john sharp was the chairman of the of a commission in to have that sense to coordinate so we might disagree on certain things but the texas democrats and republicans will stick together. >> the startling thing to me was. >> do you not still have day

wednesday afternoon?. >> i don't know the answer to that profess then be elected to the congressional delegation. you'll find this hard to believe but when dave republicans were banned from the speaker's plunge. then -- much then they met on thursday when senator hutcheson said both republicans and democrats to her office once a month with the senate appropriators they were generally well intended.

>> when i first got there then we were wrapped around the there have been efforts over the years in texas is the second biggest day in the country with a significant number of representatives in washington but we work together. >> what was said he say to the houston homeowner who was not allowed to buy flood insurance who now they are under water and now may be the mortgage is under water? >> first of all, there was an initial 15.2 billion dollars money going down for the disaster.

also for harvey and also the wildfires. you are flooding but we are burning over here. so there will be others. we are hoping to provide funding but also those different agencies so you have to look to get that finding itself. we'll get the share that we coordinate with the state used to be in the state legislature with that rainy day fund i may be off by a few dollars but there is 10 million so i said they should do the same thing. it was good to attack the

federal government to say we are spending too much money. and and to start of the state's response. with those issues so at that time judge penn's ruling is in the of billions of dollars and a lot of issues would come up with that system that they have with those waters into neighborhoods that were flooded so the question is

was that man made? if i was an attorney for the insurance company i would say there is a lot of issues coming in i hope they learned their lesson and it appears as a lot of folks that said you have to take that somewhere to provide that funding. i hope we don't get into that fight here because as we look at what happened with harvey it will take a lot of money but the big fight for the conservatives so don't get me started on sandy and with the

appropriations. >> so here we are so we have to take that third petition. >> is one thing is bipartisan. there has been an argument about this. and with that other hurricane always said is i hope we don't get into that same argument. we should take that like dead disaster. >> there was the offset from katrina.

event what those appropriation events were reduced to offset the money necessary step to rebuild new orleans. and department of homeland security took it back later. there was no reason not to do the same approach for sandy but for whatever reason you will notice with this supplemental approach. from the agency perspective the ability to be flexible at the agency level, i think it could lead be very

flexible with that. and no one even knows the price tag with these two major storms it will be weeks. komen to require significant amount of attention. and hurricane season is the same sometimes this storm happens before sometimes it is after. and i think that we did that. with those subsequent devaluation. >> and some of those will be

offset. >> we will take a few questions from the audience. >> i live here is an ostin in texas diamond army veteran i want to use thank you for your support to protect 800,000 rivers so what you planning on doing to reach across the aisle for a legislative solution for dreamers were you doing to get it on the floor for a vote?. >> when a bipartisan group is asked to go sit down and

if the speaker does not put a for a vote. my feeling is that 99 percent of the democrats will vote yes for:bin to get to the 218. because we have not been able to get a vote for perot so the speaker said he is for it but we never got a vote on and. you will have the vote so i'm hoping they put it on the floor. there is a lot of negotiations putting a

republican group to work. i got a call from the senator now from texas that the president asked me to call you working on a piece of legislation. what do you have in mind? because the dream act to me that is not negotiable to a 14th century solution with border security so the president did say strong border security so the next day they called the former amply and said we need a wall.

so we need day dream act we will deal with the wall at a later time. >>. >> one of the questions i have asked repeatedly because you cannot do this and other countries. with your first year in office we had a bill on the floor and that it was too harsh and then they have the of problem have to do with and then people are replaced by this problem.

this was in 2014. president obama said with 100,000 kids coming across the border. and that is what we have to address. at some right to define its supporters say yes reconfigure a resolution so stop putting deposition. up. >> with the of members of congress and for those that drink of water.

with $18 billion per year with border security. $80 billion per year. if you read everything. but they keep moving the goalposts. in this is never enough for the better sick --- border security. some people feel if you have a wall that solves all the problems. that is a 14th century solution. than their folks are

spending time there in where to secure the border. >> i believe bin private property rights. and if you hit a wall for example, $798 million for road 32 miles. one-quarter of a billion dollars. you have a camera sensors.

n30 percent of those undocumented persons for the visa. and we just have to be smart. and then i told secretary kelly. and they come and go. end and then two weeks later was gone. in read just have to listen to those people who live on the border and to listen to wes. and to thank you know better than the people at the border.

>> and general kelly created a great deal of difference in the short time from only a security. and it looked entirely different in may of this year because of a leadership coming out of the agency. >> talking about border security and it just sounds like buzzwords. like a dodge because i don't know what border security means. so what conditions would apply at which time you could say now we have border security. what does that mean? in very explicit terms.

not adding 150 border guards . that doesn't tell me anything we can do that easy. at that point you say now we can do daca. >> janet napolitano asked if there is operational control and and i would submit 40 percent is a failing grade. so we saw the of number of youngsters that have been apprehended in processing centers there was a up the facility to handle that. the president of the united states said it is okay but

that the board curve was flooded and hillary clinton did. but the dollars were never spent. end the infrastructure the iata infrastructure that is necessary to curtail that requires the courage and with us e-verify program is is not mandatory. >> but in 2005 by a mass to

do something for legalization for kids that were brought to this country by their parents so can we stop doing that? can we stop having people that fall into that category? the answer is no i don't know how many have arrived since january 2005 but i suspect a significant proportion. >> so they don't understand the of border. howdy use secure a border? first of all, sending $18 million per year that is the 1 yard line. if we go to the 20-yard line that secretary kelly said

across the border. in helping them to secure the border. literally hundreds of thousands of people and with other countries to secure the border with technology if somebody is against the wall they think they are against border security. look at the mobil. right now it is estimated $23 million per mile. give me $100 i will buy a good offense. i mean that. you can do that at. but with the offense -- the offense the treaty with

mexico you cannot put it at the river bank sometimes you have to go up 1 mile i will not mention the name they do have a constituent he is a veteran and his parents serve did roll for two -- served in world war two. that means if he visits the cemetery for the burial place of his parents he has to go on the other side of the fence. what about wildlife? were those bonafide centers or the of wildlife refugees? there is no respect to any of that using technology. people of washington think

if you put up a fence it solves the issues. talking about the great wall of china and i will tell you what happens stibnite that is all the time that we have today. i want to thank them for having a passionate debate. that was highly respectful. [applause]