and leonard stein horn, the co-author of a new book. professor at american university in washington, d.c. later, max boot, we will look at the president's foreign policy and what it means for the united states and our allies. newsmakers is next. enjoy the rest of your weekend and have a great week ahead. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> newsmakers with maryland , thenssman steny hoyer

president trump meets with congressional leadership to discuss immigration legislation. house democratic and republican leaders discuss immigration policy. >> mr. hoyer, thanks so much for joining us today. verye in the middle of a important, fast-moving story on these bipartisan negotiations that are underway on the status of the dreamers. can you tell us where you see

point?alks are at this we heard on friday afternoon that a group of senators had reached some sort of tentative deal but it is unclear whether this is something the house, the senate and the white house can all except, what is your understanding of where we are? i hope the senate has reached some agreement. i know that senator durbin and senator graham have been working very hard, along with a number of their colleagues on trying to reach an agreement to protect the dreamers. once i see it, we will review it and hopefully it achieves that objective in a way that can be supported by us in the house. we will see. house also working in the subsequent to the meeting we had with president trump to see whether or not we can get

agreement ourselves and whether with whate compatible senator durbin and senator graham have done. senator durbin is one of the four of us that have been meeting. mike: can you talk about what democrats are willing to discuss as well as the path to legal status and citizenship democrats have proposed in the dream act and other legislation. whathoyer: let me tell you our belief is and what our perspective is and what we think ought to be done. a unanimous view among the 25 members at the meeting with the president on wednesday that we needed to protect the dreamers. we needed to pass legislation that would left this pall over them which risks sending them to places they do not know and is not their home. that is our principal objective.

the president and the others have said they want to discuss other things within that context. we believe there are many things that need to be discussed what we believe most of them ought to be discussed within comprehensive immigration reform. one of the things the president was emphatic on was that we were talking about two phases on immigration reform. the first phase would deal with protecting the dreamers. deal with phase would a much broader, comprehensive immigration reform. the congress i've talked to believes the immigration system in america is broken and we need to pass comprehensive immigration reform. it was clear that everybody also agreed that without getting into the comprehensive immigration reform, we need to protect the dreamers. mr. hoyer, thank you for

being here this afternoon. i want to ask you about other things that were included with the negotiations as well as immigration based on family ties. if those things end up being concluded in a deal on the senate side, how do you sell that to your colleagues in the house who are on the more progressive side? is that something you could convince them to accept in the name of providing protections for young people? seen ther: i have not agreement yet so i'm not willing to comment on whether i would support it. i want to see it first. obviously, there are a lot of parties in play here. the president, the republican leadership in the senate and members in thean senate and house as well as democratic members in the senate and the house. there are a lot of different views. things are going to be discussed. i want to go back to the central theme of the wednesday meeting

with president trump. it was to do this in two phases. soon,h of them relatively accordingimmediately, to the president, very focused on getting this done before the 19th of january when we have the continuing resolution under consideration, of protecting the dreamers. we all know there are other things that were discussed and brought up and added to discussion points by the majority leader in the house. they dealt with family reunification, they dealt with what i want to tall opportunity bees is, diverse city visa -- what i want to call opportunity diversityerse city -- visas, but the dreamers the principal -- whatever comes out

of the senate agreement, an agreement it would be necessary to have the president sign off on is compatible with the items we can support in the house of representatives. phasespeaking of the two of immigration reform, do you think there is appetite in an election year to do comprehensive immigration reform? ,s that something republicans who are going to face a difficult midterm election, are going to want to even discuss, much less put to a vote? was clear that the president thought pursuing comprehensive immigration reform was necessary and appropriate and ought to be done immediately following legislation he requested to a dress protection of the dreamers in a way that he believes is appropriate and that is legislation he can sign into law. we are happy to do that, we want to do it.

we want to give permanent protection to individuals who are american in every sense but birthright and who have made such positive contribution to our country. we leave that wednesday meeting, i am wondering what it is like for you in that room. susan: what do you think, sitting so close to the president and the way he handled the discussion in the room? rep. hoyer: he thought this issue needed to be accomplished quickly, and everyone around the room, when questioned about the president if they agreed on the proposition, did a great. -- did agree. i thought that was the important aspect of this meeting.

the president has given some energy to getting this done. a day after we see that the senate which has been meeting for four months now has an agreement. i am not sure how why that agreement is but it is being discussed with the president, i think that is useful. it is obvious on the house side that we have been waiting for discussions for some period of time and those up been undertaken by the majority of leaders. we have seen energy added to this discussion which is so immediate. we need to act now -- dreamers are at risk, we are losing 122 dreamers a week, they are losing their daca protections and losing their employment rights which harms them and their employer and their families. we need to address this. i think with the energy and the urgency that the president discussed but i think was an important aspect of the meeting. mike: to follow-up on that, that

was obviously an unorthodox meeting. you have been in more than a few white house meetings over the years. a lot of people looked at that and said that was actually president trump at his best. this is the dealmaker he said he was going to be that was going to bring diverse people together , try to get an outcome. think having that happen in front of cameras was a positive thing or would it have been more advantageous to have the traditional sit behind closed doors and hash it out? rep. hoyer: i think usually it is the traditional, behind closed doors, so everyone is not thinking about what the immediate reaction of the public is going to be and can talk candidly and try to go back and

forth. the cameras being present did not adversely affect the meeting but certainly they can stifle real discussion. was an unusual thing to happen, i have been to a lot of meetings with four of the five presidents with whom i have served and this was unique. , notnk the president surprisingly, thought this was a good for him for him and i think to some degree it was a show. having said that, i do not want to be cynical because it did have the effect of energizing the focus on protecting the dreamers. i think that is a positive aspect. talking about the unorthodox presidency, we talk about how that must've been the best of the president.

morning, on friday, we saw what might have been the worst of the president. he tweeted out criticism of a bill, the intelligence reauthorization bill that the house passed and came out -- came outbill, against the bill has an ministration had endorsed not 24 hours earlier. what is your reaction to that this say about the president and his grasp of the policies he is promoting? rep. hoyer: i think this is the dangerous aspect of this presidency. an unfocused, unreliable leadership which changes its views pretty much on a dime. , theis case, the president administration set down a statement of administrative policies supporting the intel recommended bill to revise section 702 of the foreign

intelligence act. morning thes president sent out a tweet which appeared to contradict that statement of administration policy and oppose the underation that was consideration. two hours later, the president then said we would be. to support this bill and he said be smart and pass this bill. troubling aspect of this presidency because not only on it in this country, but our allies around the world rely on stump degree some degree of stability in the administration and the stability of knowing where the administration is, what policies they are pursuing and what advice they are giving.

when you have that changing from hour it -- from hour to is not good for our country and our national stability. anna: the president will be a huge factor in the elections in november. i wonder how you explain to your base this image of democrats working with republicans and this president on an issue that is as important as immigration, on something the democratic base feels strongly about and if this deal is seen as going too far on the side of republican or the side of those who want to build a wall. how do you explain that your base in terms of working with the president? the bottom line is we want to protect dreamers. not only those protected by daca but those who are in the same situation but did not sign up. some of them are saying to

themselves i'm glad i did not sign up with the promise that was then reneged upon by a new president. i think that the base, 86% of america once to see these dreamers protected, once -- wants to see these young people kept here in the only country they know, the country whose culture, whose education, whose language is there's -- is their 's. i have met with a number of dreamers over the last few months and they have demonstrated such an extraordinary love of the

country, involvement in such positive ways, employment, schools, military, education, and they're making such a difference. country thatin our i think the overwhelming majority of americans, not just the base believe we need to get this done. we need to do so, and we need to do so without damaging other interests and values we have as a country, in particular, family reunification. i was chairman of the helsinki commission in europe for 10 years and in six of those years, the soviet union existed. remember traveling frequently, three or four times a year to the soviet union and other soviet bloc countries controlled by communist dictatorships and , urging, and

amending that they allow family -- and demanding that they allow family reunification. ironic if the united states was responsible for dividing families. what we want to do is protect these dreamers who are making such positive contribution to our country. is that something the president will be able to claim as a political win that will make him more appealing to moderate americans or people who would be willing to give him a chance based on his leadership? rep. hoyer: that may be the fact. it is not a question of who gets the political benefit out of an agreement that protects the dreamers, it is the fact that that happens and that is what is important. if we spend all of our time worrying about who gets the political credit or not, then we will not be doing our job properly. we will not be doing what americans think we ought to be

doing. they think we ought to be adopting policies that are productive and positive for our country. whether the president gets credit or not, if he signs a bill that protects the dreamers and does not diminish other values we hold strong, i think he is going to get credit and so be it. mike: we are just about 11 months from midterm election day. obviously the landscape as we see it now is stark and the democrat's favor. , outiday we had a poll putting the generic ballot advantage at 17 points for democrats, and unheard of level. you have 30 retirements of the majority party in the house, that is a level that is not been

seen even in 1994 when you had 50 plus seats swing. are you seeing the elements of an electoral wave coming and would it be a disappointment if democrats cannot retake the house later this year? rep. hoyer: i expect us to retake the house and i do so because the environment is such that the american people are looking for stability and they are looking for focus on the issues they care about in terms of jobs and education and health care, in terms of the environment, in terms of our national security. i think they view democrats as being able to provide some tobility to our country and provide a proper check and balance to our system when we see a president who has trouble creating stability within the white house, much less within our government.

i am very positive. i think we are going to take back the house and we see all over the country a real enthusiasm and energy in the democratic base, we see a republican party that i think expects to lose control of the house of representatives. i do not think any of them would private, but in conversations with some of my republican colleagues and youblican friends, they say guys are going to take back the house. we have excellent candidates throughout the country. charlie cook says there are 91 districts in play. when we had two retirements this week of republicans, charlie cook was one of the but asticators, bipartisan and very concerned about the rightness of his judgments, he says both of those districts are now going to lean democratic. thosed to pick up 24 of

91 seats, i think we will pick up more than that. members retiring in higher numbers on the republican side then we have seen in the past, but we also see in those districts a tremendous interest by democratic candidates of running. that means they think their neighbors and friends in their districts are prepared to vote democratic and so they are enthusiastic about running. i think the 17 points is correct and it is historically high. think that is amazing, not necessarily surprising given the environment which has been created in the country. mike: let me mention one of the few flip sides. you mentioned the candidates that have stepped forward or been recruited. they are being asked pointed

questions about the democratic leadership in the house. you are part of one of the longest tenured party leadership teams in history. they are being asked on a routine basis whether they would support leader pelosi for another term as speaker and a lot of them are saying they would not, most recently potter lamb who isor running in the special election in pennsylvania. theses your reaction to candidates saying nancy pelosi and steny hoyer, their time is done. rep. hoyer: my advice to candidates is to tell the people what they believe and what they think in terms of the best interests of their country. instances, that will make that decision when it occurs. they do not know whether we will be in the majority. they do not know what offices

will be available, whether the speaker's office will be available for voting on the democratic side, i think it will. they will have to decide on what they want to tell their constituents. my advice to all of our candidates is tell your constituents the truth, tell them what you feel and if you want to wait to make a judgment on that, tell them that as well. i think the american public will think that makes some sense. see what happens in the election, and make your decision when it is time. anna: in this last year of the 5th congress, what are your priorities after we get through the deal on immigration in the budget cap? is it market stabilization for health insurance? is there any policy issue you would like to see addressed? for the last year we

have addressed two issues, one is the republicans effort to repeal health care, the second is for the republicans to pass their tax bill. they were not successful at first, they were successful in the second. they have undermined the affordable care act but it still exists and is still going to help millions of people. some of the issues you mentioned, when we get those out-of-the-way, we have been discussing the dreamers, we need to pass a bill which protects them. we need to come to an agreement caps -- that means how much money we are going to spend on the discretionary side of the budget. refer to as money you make a decision annually to spend on education, on defense, on health care. we have to have a caps

agreement. we had for the last four agreement a caps agreement reached by speaker ryan and senator murray. what it said is that the increase in domestic spending would have parity. the increases would be the same. that is all we're asking for, the agreement we have had for the last four years. republicans have refused to make that agreement. we think that is not reasonable and not fare so we will see whether we can get the caps. we are four legislative days away from shutting down government and the republicans have not yet agreed to what we think is a replication of what was done for the last four years that speaker ryan made the deal on. he is now the speaker of the house. we do not know why that has not happened. when need to pass appropriation bills, and omnibus of some type

to fund the various agencies of government and protect and serve our people. infrastructure is a significant piece of legislation. in our opinion, stabilizing the affordable care act so millions and millions of people are not or thethout health care prices of their premiums are substantially increased, we do not want either one of those objectives. we need to fix some of the things in the affordable care act that were not working as well as we projected. it is instructive to our republican friends that since they have been in office over the last year, support for the hasrdable care act substantially increased among the american public as they have seen its benefits. there are other pieces of legislation that we need to consider. they are the main ones i think we will be focusing on, we will see what the republicans put forward. there is a disagreement he tween

the republican leadership in the house and the republican leadership in the senate. the house, speaker ryan said he wanted to, and having passed a tax bill that creates 2 trillion dollars of additional debt to take some from social security and medicare to fill that hole. we think that is bad policy in light of the fact that the tax cut was for the wealthiest in our country. senator mcconnell seems to have prevailed with the white house in pursuing infrastructure and we will see whether that holds. susan: we're out of time. as we close here, the clock is ticking on this deadline for making decisions regarding the extension of the cr. how likely is a deal and to avoid a government shutdown?

rep. hoyer: it is difficult to handicap. we have given three extensions. to simply keep kicking the can down the road does not seem to make any sense. we have to come to grips with decisions. we have to come to grips with compromises that will move us forward. reauthorization of the child health insurance program. we should have done that prior to september 30 of last year. what we need to come to grips with, and my handicapping will be as to the willingness of republicans to make compromises. , all we're asking for is exactly what they agreed to for the last four years. it should not be difficult to do that. i am hopeful that we will be successful between now and next

friday and coming to an agreement on important things, a supplemental for puerto rico and the virgin islands and florida to make sure our friends that were hurt by the storms are given assistance. andake sure we pass chip make sure we pass the protection for the dreamers. susan: thank you so much for your time on "newsmakers." who has the momentum right now? mike: that is a hard question. you have a bipartisan group of senators on a bill that will provide permanent legal status -- it would be a huge win for democrats.

we do not know the full outlines of that deal, whether it can pass muster with the white house. the idea that all of this is centered around giving democrats what they want on the dreamer issue is a big deal for them. it is too early to tell. anna: i think it is hard to tell who has the momentum. the center oft gravity is in the senate as it usually is. the senate is where democrats definitely have leverage. they need nine democrats to get on board if all republicans support whatever compromises worked out. in the house, nancy pelosi only has leverage if ryan cannot keep his house republicans on his side. it'll be interesting to see the dynamics in the republican party and how firm an alliance they can take on this issue, not just on immigration but on the budget caps.

susan: do deficits and the debt matter anymore in this town? mike: feel free to take that one. anna: government spending matters to republicans. they want to draw down the size of government. commitmentt the same to looking at the long-term deficit, especially with this tax bill. $1.5 projected to add trillion over the next decade and that is something that is not totally surprising for the party in power. the party in power is usually less concerned about deficits. they like candy and they hate spinach. tax cuts and spending are candy and tax hikes and spending cuts are spinach. it is hard to do those. only under the most extreme scenarios, such as the 2011

fiscal deal do you see any real discussion to talk about that. now that republicans have passed a tax bill that is going to increase -- decreased revenues by 1.5 chile and dollars -- by 1.5 trillion dollars -- susan: that is our time. thank you very much for your questions for mr. boyer this week. hoyer thisr mr. week. anna: thank you. "q&a" and on c-span's author with his book "the accidental president: harry s truman and the four months that changed the world.

>> truman was terrified to give a speech after roosevelt died. he climbs the four stairs to the pulpit and looks out and sees his wife in the crowd and she is roosevelt ise dead, the nation is in shock and she never wanted to be the first lady, she never wanted her husband to be president. she is frightened for him. yes to get up there and inspire confidence in his administration -- he has to get up there and inspire conference -- inspire confidence in his administration. "q&a."ght on c-span's "afterwords"ht on shepherdstown university law professor peter edelman looks at the way the courts penalize the poor through excessive fines and fees.

he is interviewed by georgia congressman hank johnson. >> is poverty an issue in terms of the war on drugs, on the victims of the war on drugs? how is poverty play into that? >> what happens to families, what happens to the men who have been locked up, all the collateral consequences, they cannot get jobs, they are not allowed to live in public housing. countryaws across the require consequences of one kind or another. it destroys somebody's life. if they were not poor when they went into prison, they are definitely poverty-stricken for the rest of their lives. "afterwords" sunday night at 9:00 eastern on "book tv" on