hour of need vermonters once again led the way. thank you. [applause] 30,n tuesday, january president trump will get his first state of the union address. our coverage begins with a preview at 8:00 p.m., followed by the state of the union address at 9:00. after that we take your calls in every action from members of congress. live on c-span, c-span.org, and available on our free radio lab.

-- radio app. "newsmakers" is pleased to welcome the number two democrat who is joining us from capitol hill. mr. hoyer, thanks so much for joining us today. rep. hoyer: i hope i have lots of answers but it's good to be with you. reporters -- our two reporters cover mr. bowyer and congress. you will start with you, mike. mike: thanks much for joining us today. it is a busy day. we are in the middle of a very important, fast-moving story on these bipartisan negotiations that are underway on the status of the dreamers. can you tell us where you see these talks are at this point? 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? rep. hoyer: i hope the senate has reached some agreement. i don't know what is in the 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. we are also working in the house subsequent to the meeting we had , with president trump to see whether or not we can get agreement ourselves and whether that can be compatible with what 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 path, then to the legal status and citizenship democrats have proposed in the dream act and other legislation? rep. hoyer: let me tell you what our belief is and what our perspective is and what we think ought to be done. there was 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 lift this pall over them which risks sending them to places they do not know and is not their home. that is our principal objective. clearly 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, but 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 really talking about two phases on immigration reform. the first phase would deal with protecting the dreamers. the second phase would deal with a much broader, comprehensive immigration reform. everybody in the congress i've talked to believes the immigration system in america is broken and we need to pass comprehensive immigration reform. but it was clear that everybody also agreed that without getting into the comprehensive immigration reform, we need to protect the dreamers. anna: mr. hoyer, thank you for being here this afternoon. it is good to see you. i want to ask you about other things that were included with the negotiations as well as immigration based on family ties. and the visa lottery system.

if those things end up being included 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? rep. hoyer: i have not seen the agreement yet so i'm not willing to comment on whether i would be willing to ask people to support it. i want to see it first. let me say something. obviously, there are a lot of parties in play here. the president, the republican leadership in the senate and house, republican members in the 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. do both of them relatively soon,

but to do immediately, according 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. obviously 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 leasesportunity --visas.. what i want to call opportunity visas, diversity visas, but the principal perspective of the meeting, and i hope whatever comes out of the senate agreement, an agreement which would be necessary to have the president sign off on is compatible with the items we can

support in the house of representatives. anna: speaking of the two phases of immigration reform, do you think there is appetite in an election year to do comprehensive immigration reform? is that something republicans, who are going to face a very difficult midterm election, are going to want to even discuss, much less put to a floor vote? rep. hoyer: it was clear that the president thought pursuing comprehensive immigration reform was necessary and appropriate and ought to be done immediately following passing legislation, which 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 a positive contribution to our country. susan: before we leave that

wednesday meeting that was televised i am wondering what ,it was like in the room. much of it seems to be based on where you sit politically. we saw the president was in good form as a negotiator are not. what do you think, sitting so close to the president and the way he handled the discussion in the room? rep. hoyer: what i think is important is the president indicated he believed this issue was important, needed to be accomplished quickly, and a talking about the protection of the dreamers. and that everybody around the room, when questioned about the president as to if the agreed for the proposition did in fact agree. i thought that was the important aspect of this meeting. obviously 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 wide 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. i think we have seen some energy added to this discussion which is so immediate. we need to act and we need to act now. dreamers are at risk. we are losing 122 dreamers a week. they are losing their daca protections and as a result 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 that i think was an important aspect of the meeting. mike: to follow-up on that, that was obviously an unorthodox type of 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 and try to get an outcome. having that happen in the open 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 -- when you say 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. i think the cameras being present did not adversely affect the meeting but certainly they can stifle real discussion.

it 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. i think the president, not surprisingly, thought this was a good forum 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. mike: if we can pivot a little bit talking about the unorthodox , presidency. we talk about how that must've been the best of the president. i think this 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 against the bill his an ministration had endorsed not 24 hours earlier. what is your reaction to that and what does this say about the president and his grasp of the policies he is promoting? rep. hoyer: frankly i think this , is the dangerous aspect of this presidency. a very unfocused, unreliable in many respects leadership which changes its views pretty much on a dime. in this case, the president -- the administration set down a statement of administrative policies supporting the intel recommended bill to revise section 702 of the foreign intelligence act. sometime this morning the

president sent down a tweet which appeared to contradict that statement of administration policy and oppose the legislation that was under consideration. two hours later, the president then said oh no, we would be foolish not to support this bill, be smart and pass this bill. that is a troubling aspect of this presidency because not only do we rely on it in this country, but our allies around the world rely on some degree of stability in the administration and 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 to hour, it is not good for our country and our national

-- international 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 with 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 republicans who are going too far who want to build a wall on the southern border with mexico how do you explain that your , base in terms of working with the president? rep. hoyer: the bottom line is we want to protect dreamers. we want to protect dreamers not , only those protected by daca but those who are in the same situation but did not sign up. very frankly some of them are , saying to themselves, boy i'm , glad i did not sign up with the promise that was then reneged upon by a new president. in this case president trump.

however i think that the base, , i thinkrefer to it 86% of america once to see these that wants to see these young people kept here in the only country they know, the country whose culture, whose education, whose language is theirs. not be sent to places they don't know. particularly when you do how positive a contribution they are making to the country. i 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, school, military, education, and they're making such a difference.

and adding value in our country that 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. i remember traveling frequently, three or four times a year to the soviet union and other soviet bloc countries controlled by communist dictatorships and pleading with, urging, and demanding and many respects that they allow family reunification. it would be ironic if the united states now was responsible for

dividing families. we don't want to do that. what we want to do is protect these dreamers who are making such a positive contribution to our country. susan: we have nine minutes left in the interview. anna: is that something the president will be able to claim as a political win that will make him more appealing to maybe some moderate americans or people who would be willing to give him a chance based on his leadership? rep. hoyer: that may be the fact. again 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 that 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 -- in the democrats' favor. on friday we had a poll come out putting the generic ballot advantage at 17 points for democrats, an 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 flip. 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, the majority. i do so because the environment is such that the american people are looking for some stability. they are looking for focus on the issues they care about in terms of jobs and education and in terms of health care. in terms of the environment and in terms of our national security. i think they view democrats as being able to provide some stability to our country and to a proper check and balance in 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 in many respects expects to lose control of the house of representatives. i do not think any of them would say that, but in private conversations with some of my republican colleagues and republican friends, they say you 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, who is one of the prognosticators, but a bipartisan and very concerned about the rightness of his judgments, he says both of those districts republicans are now retiring in willing democratic. we need to pick up 24 of those 91 seats. i think we will pick up more than that. we see not only members retiring in higher numbers on the republican side then we have seen in the past, but we also

have seen in those districts a tremendous interest by democratic candidates of running. that means they think their neighbors and friends and 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. generic numbers, democrats ahead of republicans by 17 points. i 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 terrific candidates that have stepped forward and then 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 connor lamb who is running in the special election in pennsylvania said he wanted to see a new generation of leadership. what is your reaction to these candidate saying basically 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. in some instances, that will be they want to make that decision when it occurs. because they do not know whether we will be in the majority. i think 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 frankly 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 is going to happen any election, see where we are and , make your decision when it is time. anna: in the months we have before the midterm election in , this last year of the 115th congress, what are your priorities for the 2018 agenda question mark after we get through the deal on immigration in the budget cap? is it infrastructure? is it addressing issues of the tax bill? is it market stabilization for health insurance? is there any policy issue you would like to see addressed this year? rep. hoyer: for the last year we have addressed two issues, one is the republicans effort to repeal health care, which we

think will be harmful to the american people. 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 on caps. that means how much money we are going to spend on the discretionary side of the budget. we have a lot of entitlements like social security and medicare. what the caps refer to as money you make a decision annually to spend on education, on defense, on health care. on running the government. we have to have a caps agreement. we had for the last four years a caps agreement reached by speaker ryan and senator murray.

what it said is that the increase in domestic spending and defense spending would have priority. -- 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. frankly, 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. then we need to pass appropriation bills, and omnibus of some type to fund the various agencies of government and protect our people and serve our people. yes infrastructure is a , significant piece of legislation. in our opinion, stabilizing the

affordable care act so millions and millions of people are not left without health care or the 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 affordable care act has substantially increased among the american public as they have seen its benefits. there are other pieces of legislation that we need to consider. but they are the main ones i think we will be focusing on, we will see what the republicans put forward. i think there is a disagreement between the republican leadership in the house and the republican leadership in the senate. in the house, speaker ryan said

he wanted to, having passed a tax bill that creates $1.5 trillion to $2 trillion 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: i will jump in because we are out of time. as we close here, the clock is ticking on this deadline for making decisions regarding the extension of the cr. handicap it for us. how likely is a deal and to avoid a government shutdown? rep. hoyer: well it is difficult , to handicap. frankly my position has been 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. we need to pass 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. for instance on the caps, all we're asking for is exactly what they agreed to for the last four years. it seems to me 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, caps, a supplemental for puerto rico and the virgin islands and florida and texas to make sure

our friends and fellow citizens hurt badly by the storms are given assistance. and make sure we pass chip and make sure we pass the protection for the dreamers. susan: thank you so much for your time on newsmakers. come back again please. rep. hoyer: thanks a lot. susan: this is a very fluid situation. who has the momentum right now? mike: that is a hard question. i think as of friday afternoon you have this bipartisan group of senators talking about a bill will moste very least like the provided permanent least dacas to at recipients. 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. but it is too early to tell. anna: is hard to tell who has the momentum but we can say the center of gravity is in the senate, as it usually is. because the math is trickier over there, and the senate is definitely where democrats have leverage. they need nine democrats to get on board if all republicans support whatever compromises worked out. in the house, minority leader nancy pelosi only has leverage if ryan can't keep his house republicans unified. it will be interesting to see the dynamics within the republican party and see how firm a line they can take on these issues. not just on immigration, but also on the budget caps, like mr. hoyer said. >> do the deficits and debt matter anymore in these talks? [laughter] >> feel free to take that one.

>> i think government spending definitely matters to republicans. something they want to draw down, shrink the size of government. that there is not the same commitment to looking at the long-term deficit, especially with this tax bill that is projected to add $1.5 trillion over the next decade and i think that is something that is not totally surprising for the party in power. the party in power usually is less concerned about deficits than when they are in the minority. love candy and hate spinach. it is very hard to do those, as it has been proven repeatedly. only under the most extreme the 2011, such as fiscal deal, do you see any real discussion to talk about that.

now that republicans have passed a tax bill that is going to decrease revenues by $1.5 trillion, the question is, are we setting up another moment like that? >> that is it for our time. we have a lot more to discuss. we have not even gotten to his definitive statement on the 2018 take back of the house, but thank you very much for your questions this week. >> thank you. [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] >> c-span, where history unfold staley. in 19 -- unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's television companies, and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. >> now, c-span recently talked with speaker of the house paul ryan. this is about 15 minutes.