again we want to unconstrain the victims from coming forth. thank you-all very much. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> the house is back at noon eastern to work on several bills. one would set policy for the e.p.a.'s brownfield hazardous waste cleanup program. another would expand the probationary period for new federal employees and also new managers in the federal government senior executive service. when the house comes back into session at noon eastern, live coverage here on c-span. until then a conversation from this morning's "washington journal" on the senate g.o.p. tax bill. on in the senate, ryan joins us from capitol hill. he's the appropriations and tax reporter. good morning to you. guest: good morning. host: the fact that we're already in a debate on this, what is the potential we might

see passage of this proposal by the end of the week? guest: it seems likely at this point. today they'll be taking up amend ams and probably get into vote-o-rama, the where senators can offer unlimited amendments. that could stretch into late into the night tonight, potentially followed by a vote on final passage. it's possible it could stretch out any longer, but as far as we know, they are on end to finish by the end of this week. host: some of the amendments coming from republicans stray a little bit from the original intent. walk us through those and what's the most important one to watch? guest: i think a very important someone coming from senators marco rube scombrow mike lee, who would essentially make the child tax credit fully refundable against payroll taxes. this is a proposal that could draw some democratic support. we're not really sure how democrats will play this, but it pays for some of the changes by actually raising the corporate tax rate a little bit

from what is proposed under the underlying bill. that's sort of a big one to watch. there are a lot in the queue, but that's the highlight of this morning. host: also, there was some news this morning and yesterday from senator bob corker, calling for this idea of a trigger. walk us through how that works and what other republicans think about this proposal. guest: this trigger idea gained momentum in the past few days, and how it would work is essentially a few years down the line, if these tax cuts are passed, if there's a large increase to annual deficits, which is projected by a lot of the independent analysis that have come out, then this trigger mechanism would essentially kick in and claw back some of the revenue that has been lost. now, this is an idea pushed by some deficit hawks like senator bob corker of tennessee, as you mentioned, but there are other republicans and some conservative outside groups who are opposed to it. they say this is essentially giving corporations and

companies less certainty about what the future of the tax policy will look like, and so they're opposed to it, and senators and tax writers and republican leaders are trying to find a compromise that will get these senators on board, but also not lose any other votes who may be concerned about this trigger mechanism. host: one more amendment, from senators ron johnson and steve danes, the idea of how pass-through corporations are handled may need an explanation of what they are and what's being proposed by them. could you give us that, please? guest: yes, ron johnson of wisconsin and steve danes of montana were the two, only two republican senators to come out initially and say they're actually opposed to the original bill. they were pushing for these changes to pass-through businesses. they wanted the tax bill essentially to be more favorable to small businesses relative to large corporations, and they seem to have reached a deal yesterday that would raise the amount of deductible income for these pass-through

businesses, and that was enough to get them to support the first vote, just to take up the tax bill, and it seems to be -- may be good enough to get them to a yes on final passage. it essentially makes the bill slightly more favorable to smaller businesses like s corporations or partnerships, etc. host: the senate majority leader has to appease a lot of members of his party in order to get this passed. aside from those you mentioned, who else is getting extra attention from the majority leader? guest: senator susan collins of maine is seen as another senator on the fence. she's pushed for some changes regarding deductions per state and local taxes, which would be fully eliminated under the senate plan. she's pushed to restore some of those deductions. she's also pushed for passage of separate healthcare legislation, which would aim to sort of mitigate some of the damage that may occur if they repeal the individual mandate from the 2010 healthcare law, which is part of the senate tax

plan. so she's one of the votes that republican leaders are trying to shore up. there's a few others we don't know exactly where senator john mccain stands on the proposal. he's been somewhat quiet. there's a few on the fence to watch. host: for senator mccain being so quiet at this point, is there anything to take away from that? guest: hard to know. in the past, he has voted against republican tax plans, and just recently he's been advocating for more regular process, and he seems to have indicated that he's happier with the way that this tax process has gone compared to the healthcare repeal effort earlier this year. so it's hard to know exactly where he stands right now, but we'll find out soon. host: what about the individual mandate? this was a matter of discussion leading up to this point. where do we stand on that as far as this proposal is concerned? guest: well, it would be repealed under this tax proposal, which was a big controversy when it was announced in the bill. as i said, some senators are

pushing for separate legislation that would seek to sort of mitigate some of the effects of that, but that is in the bill as it currently stands. ost: if this does pass, what faces the senate and house? guest: there's really big differences they have to work through. some central parts of the plan including just basic individual tax rates and the house version did not have this repeal of the individual mandate, so there's a lot of big issues that they'll have to work through in the conference committee after the senate passes its plan, if they do, and that could take, you know, anywhere from weeks to possibly even months if it drags out, but republicans are obviously aiming to finish before the end of the year. that's an ambitious timeline, but we'll see if they're able to make that. host: as far as influence from the white house, have they played a role in these final hours leading up to the vote? guest: they have -- yes, they have been involved in this process, more so sort of than they were during the healthcare

repeal effort. gary cone and steve mnuchin, the treasury secretary, have been on the hill meeting, pushing some ideas, and president trump himself has been, as we've seen, tweeting out ideas through the process about essentially policies that he wants in or out of the proposal, and he's sort of also just been rallying senators from the sidelines. he was on the hill earlier this week to rally support for the bill. so they have been involved and expect them to continue to be involved. host: at this point, how are democrats playing out this process? guest: well, they're expected to be unanimously opposed to the bill. they see it as essentially much more favorable to large corporations and wealthy taxpayers than average americans, and we've heard a lot of fiery debate so far, and it's not likely to see any democrats peel off and support the plan. host: ryan, who reports on appropriations and tax matters for c.q. roll call joining us.

his latest story looks at the procedural matters and the process that plays out. you can see it for yourself when you watch at c-span2. ryan mccrimmon, thanks for your time. our guest mentioned democrats and their reaction. senator chuck schumer, the senate minority leader, yesterday on the floor of the senate talking about the plan, particularly aiming his comments when it comes to corporate taxes. here's him from yesterday. senator schumer: it's no wonder the bill is so unpopular with the american people. in every survey that i have seen, and every state survey that i have seen, the numbers who dislike the bill exceed most cases by a lot those who like the bill. just like healthcare. now, corporate profits are at an all-time high. companies are flush with cash. the richest 1% of americans receive 20% of the overall national income. the richest 1% get 20% of the

income. god bless them. i don't like that percentage. that percentage hasn't been matched in nearly a century since the roaring 1920's. but do they need a tax break? come on. corporations and the wealthy are doing great right now. god bless them. them don't need a tax cut. to lavish them with huge tax breaks and ask the middle class to bear so much of the cost, that fwets it backwards. that's not a bill anyone in this chamber can be proud of, whether your views are for tax cuts or not. the main argument my republican colleagues use to counter these damning tax, what i say is the core argument of their tax plan is that as massive corporate tax cut would grow the economy and make it easier for companies to invest in their workers. the argument that a massive

corporate tax cut leads to more jobs and higher wages is a flimsy house of cards that falls down under the slightest scrutiny. host: justin from ohio, republican line. go ahead. caller: hey, good morning. i was going to make a comment. senator schumer, i think he's kind of comical. you know, these guys keep talking about rich versus poor. there's only one way to raise wages, and that's through economic growth and demand for labor. now, i don't know how a democrat thinks that happens if businesses aren't flourishing, especially senator schumer, who lives lives in new york, where all the major corporations are. he knows this is good for his state, but he's got to toe that political line. that's really all we get from d.c., this political line, this hyper bolick reaction to everything. all these crazy predictions. nobody knows what's going to nap 10 years. nobody knows what the deficit

is going to be. they're about to negotiate budget in a month. they've got to come up with a budget resolution. if everyone is worried about the deficit, like your previous commentator was talking about, bob corker being a deficit hawk, which is just silly. there's no deficit hawks in washington, d.c., if they're really concerned about the deficit, they got a budget negotiation coming up in a week. cut the spending, and you got no deficit problem. host: let's go to patty, sterling, virginia, democrats line. caller: yeah, good morning. i'd like to disagree with the guy that just called from ohio about 100%. the way you stimulate the economy is you glt mohr money in the pockets of people who actually need stuff, who actually have a 10-year-old car and would like to buy another one, but their salary has been flat-lined for 10 years. i think what we're seeing here is sort of this mass -- masked

illusion that if we just do the same thing question at the beginning of the george w. bush administration and give us a little bit of money back to people who, you know, could use it, but then give a ton of money to the people who are supposed to be stimulating business, that's not what stimulate business. what stimulates business is demand. demand comes from people who actually need stuff. so i guess, you know, i'm really, really >> you can can see the rest of the washington jourm segment on our website, c spafment.org. click on the series tab on tonight of c spafment.org and on "washington journal." right now here on c-span we take you live to the floor of the u.s. house which today is working on legislation dealing with the e.p.a.'s brownfield hazardous waste cleanup program and a bill expanding the probatna