health threats facing the u.s. that is that 10:00 a.m. eastern. joe biden gives his take on u.s.-russia relations. on c-span2, cia director mike pompeo on national security and intelligence challenges facing his agency. the senate is back at noon and they continue debate on jerome powell to be chairman of the federal reserve. c-span3, the senate energy and natural resources committee examines the impact of major weather events on the electric power grid at 10:00 a.m. eastern. thursday morning, we are live in columbia, south carolina for the next off -- stop on the c-span bus 50 capital store -- tour.

♪ the built before us does before usgs -- bill does three things that every republican and democrat should be able to support. first, it ends the shutdown and restores full funding for the federal government through february 8. second, it extends health insurance for 9 million vulnerable children. it will enable congress to resume series bipartisan talks on the important issues facing our nation. >> what do that, the federal government is beginning to reopen after a weekend shutdown. " washington today " on c-span radio. 17 days until the government funding runs out. today's agreement is a

short-term continuing resolution. in exchange for ending the stalemate, republicans have promised to take up the daca immigration issue. here are some of your other monday headlines. steve scalise of a louisiana returning to the capital after undergoing another round of surgery. part of his recovery after a shooting that took place last year. the pennsylvania supreme court issuing a ruling on the states congressional map. the court has now ordered pennsylvania lawmakers to redraw the congressional map ahead of the 2018 midterm elections. in israel, vice president pence announced the u.s. embassy will open in jerusalem before the end of the next year and he said the door is open for palestinians to enter the peace negotiations. we begin with this headline. on the hill.com.

here's how this transpired earlier today. here is a chuck schumer of new york. senator schumer: i expect the majority leader to abide by this agreement. if he does not, of course, and i expect he will, he will have breached the trust of not only the democratic senators, but members of his own party as well. through these complicated and lengthy negotiations, democrats have always sought to be reasonable, to act in good faith and get something real done. despite all of our entreaties, the president was obstinate. despite bipartisan support for daca, the republican majority dithered. host: the senate democratic leader chuck schumer. joining us live here is bob cusack. what a weekend. >> very much so.

a very contentious weekend where both parties were playing chicken. now republicans are basically getting what they want and that's different than prior shutdowns we've seen in the clinton administration and obama administration. without a doubt there's a lot of frustration with senator schumer on capitol hill and among immigration activists. host: what happened between last night, we heard senator schumer on the senate floor, and mid morning today? guest: i think the pressure from centrist democrats up for reelection in trump states, they got more and more nervous. if you think about it, friday's vote was to advance the funding bill. five democratic senators voted for it. fast forward to today on the procedural motion and there were 33 senators who caucused with the democrats who backed basically the same bill. ok, the timeline was a little different. the republicans were unified in their message. they were very aggressive.

in 2013 when they were trying to get rid of obamacare funding they were not. they were on their heels. this situation was different, the republicans felt they had the upper hand. a lot of democrats are saying that they blinked. host: let's go through some of the senate democrats who did not support today's action. senator sanders of vermont, elizabeth wharton -- warren of massachusetts,, harris of california, what do they all have in common? guest: they're all thinking about running for president. there is no doubt about it that those candidates who are thinking about it, who are in the senate, they were critical of what senator schumer struck. interesting vote was senator tester who is up for re-election voted against this . but without a doubt you were seeing, we've written about the intra-party fights on the right. well there's a lot of intra-party fights on the left. schumer was stuck between his

centrist democrats running in red states this year and the 2020 possible presidential candidates. host: your colleague was reporting there was a smile on the face of senator mcconnell as he heard the reaction from chuck schumer on the senate floor. guest: yeah, and you don't see mitch mcconnell smile much he keeps his cards to his vest he said there will be no shutdown. but the shutdown did happen but i think he was surprised that schumer played this card because remember you go back to december, right before christmas a similar type of stopgap bill got a lot of support. less than 70 senators, but enough to advance it. this time, schumer said -- we are not going to go for this. remember, there could be another shutdown. this was over a timeline. i think some democrats are saying, well, we lost the battle but we're going to win the war because we're going to get a dreamer package. we'll see. host: and here on the senate floor, senate leader mitch mcconnell. senator mcconnell: i thank the

gentleman for his comments and his indication he intends to support the measure before us. i think if we've learned anything, i think if we've learned anything during this process it's that a strategy to shut down the government over the issue of illegal immigration is something that the american people didn't understand. and would not have understood in the future. so i'm glad we've gotten past that. we have a chance now to get back to work. and therefore, mr. president, i ask unanimous consent that the demand for a quorum call be -- the mandatory quorum call be waived. host: earlier the republicans were going after chuck schumer the democrats. guest: they really were. and the reason they were was to increase their leverage. i think they won the p.r. battle over the weekend. i saw far more republicans being

aggressive and hammering the fact that these democrats didn't oppose a lot of what was in the bill, they just wanted the dreamer package as part of this bill and they just kept hammering that home without a doubt and i think they were active on television stations. so that i think changed the dynamic but still i think a lot on the left wanted schumer to continue this battle that he should have continued to fight until they got a lot more. host: we're talking to bob cusack, and on the phone is democratic congressman jerry connolly, thank you for being with us here on c-span and c-span radio. what happened among congressional democrats? mr. connolly: i disagree with what bob said fundamentally. look, if you compare what mitch mcconnell said friday night.

it was an angry, defiant, an in your face, defiant, i am not moving an inch speech. 48 hours later, he says ok. i will shave a week off of cr. and i will agree that if by february 8 we have not dealt with some of these issues including the dreamers, i will give floor time to allow that to proceed. that, given the fact we are in the minority, i think is in or leverageus successfully being used. and i -- you know -- i'm using a lot of conventional wisdom about first and democrats losing. i do not see it like that at all. and if that, come february 8, if the republicans have not allowed us to proceed, the entire

discussion is going to be on ground of our choosing. and so, i think it is unfortunate. i am looking forward to voting yes to reopen it. but i think we actually got something. we did not get everything. but if you're disappointed, you know what? intellect the democrats to the majority in the senate and the house. we are in the minority. host: let me quote your colleague, luis gutierrez, he said, democrats are still not willing to go to the mat to allow people in my community to live in our country legally. mr. connolly: it's easier to blame your friends than to actually hold the people who really cause the problem accountable. democrats did not create this problem. it was not a democrat who rescinded the executive order

that provided protection to the dreamers. i love luis but i have to fundamentally disagree with him here. he is picking on the wrong people. and when we do that, i think we eat our own young and it sets the cause we all share back. host: congressman, as you know nancy pelosi was critical of this deal. i have a two-part question. number one, do you think going forward into february, that next deadline, that house democrats should have more of a say into whatever is struck and number two, luis gutierrez said he is willing to trade and he would even trade the trump wall for the deal on dreamers. do you agree with that? mr. connolly: luis is disappointed in democrats for not somehow insisting the government stay shut until something happened. i don't know what that would be given the fact that we're in the minority. but he's also now willing to

give away trump's wall that was promised to be paid for by the mexicans. i had no say in that. no one asked my opinion of whether i'm willing to live with a wall. and i thought just a week or two ago that that was a nonstarter. that was a deal breaker. any inclusion of a wall in any c.r. up until this point was anathema to the democratic caucus. that was our position and luis had that position. guest: what about communication? do you want house democrats to have more say when the final, final deal is struck, assuming there is one? mr. connolly: absolutely. and i think there has to be a debate and discussion within our ranks about strategy and about the outcome that are realistic, that we're seeking. host: congressman connolly, i

know that it has been a busy day . thanks for joining us here on c-span and c-span radio. mr. connolly: it's my great pleasure to see the democrats win one tonight. host: and one more question, will federal employees including those in your district receive back pay? mr. connolly: our understanding is that the bill coming from the -- the senate resolution coming from the house will include restoration of any lost salary. i hope that's accurate. host: thanks for being with us. bob, let's go down memory lane you probably remember this on saturday morning, let's listen. [sound clip] >> ♪ i'm a bill, just a bill i'm stuck on capitol hill a few key few key congressmen debate will the nation let me be a law i hope and pray that they will but today i am still just a bill ♪

host: you remember that. [laughter] guest: i do remember that. that's probably the extent of my knowledge when i came to washington about politics. i thought it was helpful. host: i played this because that's not the way the process is working today. guest: no, it's far more complicated. i have a lot of friends who are not washington insiders who are saying, what is going on to get through this complicated process of attaching stuff. how does it get passed? how does it get pyongyang back-and-forth between the house and senate? -- how does it get ping-ponged back and forth between the house and the senate? those were simpler times. host: will it change in the mid-term election? guest: i don't think so. there are members pushing for reforms for an open process, certainly in the house, whether it's democrats or the republicans, the majority usually limits amendments so they can drive home their agenda. so i don't think so.

i think the only chance for reforms to the process, and it is kind of a crazy process, some things are added at the last second, handwritten on the side. i think if the house majority in 2019 is very narrow, well, then, maybe some members will demand and they'll band together and say, we need to have more of an open process at least in the house. host: we have a new countdown clock, as we said, 17 days, about 2 and a half weeks what does that mean? guest: they've got to get another deal in that amount of time. that's not a lot of time. the house is actually -- the house members after this vote will be leaving. they're not scheduled to be here. this week they're not going to get much of anything done. then it comes down to less than two weeks. so they've got to get a deal, i think it's going to be difficult. as you know, steve, congress has been debating immigration reform for over a decade. george w. bush tried to get it. he said i'll see you at the bill signing ceremony that didn't , happen. the senate five years ago passed a bipartisan bill, didn't move

in the house. so even a small issue like the dreamers, which is not comprehensive immigration reform, i think will be very difficult to get any type of deal in 17 days. host: this shutdown looked and felt very different than 2013. no barricades along the world war ii memorial. the parks remained relatively open. there was a headline at "politico" that the trump white house wanted to make this, quote "a kinder and gentler shutdown." what was the reasoning behind this? guest: well mick mulvaney, who was in charge of the shutdown, said we're not going to weapon ize it's like the obama administration did for leverage. the obama administration did use it for leverage.

this was mostly a weekend shutdown so really the question was, would parks be open, of course today people didn't know whether they should go into work. now obviously they'll be back to work tomorrow. i think with a different approach that this white house took and probably paid off a bit. host: this is a headline from "mother joans" saying the senate democrats have traded one looming problem for another. in taking the deal democrats have drawn the wrath of fired up activists in the base that feel betrayed. i mention that from "mother jones," there's a similar headline at associated press, looming problem for another. in taking the deal democrats joining us live is julie pace, the washington bureau chief for a.p. thanks for being here with us. let me ask you about your story and reaction from democrats on the action by senator schumer today. >> immigration advocates and liberals have been at this back and forth with schumer for a couple of months over what to do with daca. you saw at the end of the year, at the end of 2017, just a lot of frustration over the fact that schumer didn't push democrats to hold the line on that c.r. then in january, we saw a lot of immigration advocates were

heartened by the fact that schumer seemed like he was going to take this to the brink. he did that. but now you see them flip back again. they're frustrated that this was only a three-day shutdown. they feel like there's no way that mitch mcconnell and paul ryan will make good on a promise to put something on immigration on the floor. and frankly that's not even what they've been promised at this point. it's a promise from mcconnell to debate these issues. host: could we find ourselveses in the same situation in another 2 1/2 weeks? >> absolutely. and i think that is what has frustrated people so much. we kind of hurdle from one crisis to another. you can envision a scenario in early to mid-february where we are having the exact same debate. where democrats are pushing for daca, for immigration to be part of the spending bill or at least for there to be a separate bill that gets passed before the

approved more government funding . and republicans say no, this is about keeping the government open. i don't think that democrats got much of a guarantee that this will go any different in february. host: let me turn to bob cusack, manager and editor in chief of "the hill" newspaper. guest: i want to get your take on what the role of the administration, the president made vulgar remarks behind closed doors that set back talks, when you talk to people on both sides of the aisle we're talking democrats are saying yeah, we didn't win this battle, maybe we'll win down the road. republicans spiking the football, how do you think trump did in this? is he a winner of this or a loser of this big battle? julie: i think he's a little bit of both. in talking to democratic aides over the weekend they pointed to that moment when he was in the oval office, made those vulgar remarks, as a turning point for the caucus. a moment where the moderates, some of these folks up for re-election in november said you know what, we can't hang with the president on this one. this has given us the [no audio] --

but i think the president also stayed quiet for the weekend and that, frankly, helped. guest: that's true. [laughter] host: where does this but the senate democratic leader. is schumer's decaying shutdown deal hurting him? is this his first major test since taking over from harry reid? julie: yes. it was the first time that democrats saw that they had leverage. this is a party that's been languishing, they could make arguments on health care but ultimately republicans stopped that from going forward. this is the first moment where you saw democrats being able to actually exert some leverage. schumer got a lot of praise from the liberals in the caucus from

liberal activists last week for the position he was taking but you are really seeing that shift today. host: one final question, i'll first pose it to bob and then get your reaction, julie. if the shutdown continued into the week, where would that have put schumer? guest: i think he made the decision it would have hurt his party. remember, democrats had a good 2017. trump did not get any big legislative win until the end of the year. he did get a big win on the tax bill. but i think some of these democrats in trump states who are up for re-election were thinking, things are going pretty well for me. this was risk. once the shutdown happened, it was risky for both sides. i think democrats saw, it's riskier for us, let's end it now, at least until we get closer to the deadline, and then maybe another, big, long shutdown. host: julie, your thoughts on that question? julie: i agree with bob. i think there's a difference between a weekend shutdown where you had fairly minimal impact and a weekday shutdown.

that's what we were starting to see today. federal workers with a lot of uncertainty, a lot of impact being predicted about the actual work they'd be doing and i think schumer and particularly those democrats were on the ballot in november in red states decided it just wasn't worth that fight. host: julie pace, washington bureau chief for the associated press. her byline of story tonight. on reaction from democrats about the government reopening. thanks for being with us. julie: thanks for having me. host: more reaction from capitol hill. we're back with bob cusack. we remember where schumer was in 2013. guest: it was something speaker boehner and mitch mcconnell did not want to follow, but did follow you and it led to a -- did follow and it led to a 17 day shutdown.

that was very much blamed on republicans. ted cruz is defending it to this day. here's what he said today. host: the texas republican senator on capitol hill. sen. cruz: i am glad the government is going to open up again today. it was a mistake for chuck schumer to shut down the government. three days of a shutdown. and the reason chuck schumer forced a shutdown is his far angry.se is they hate the president. resist everything, shut everything down. >> sounds familiar, didn't you say all this back when it happened to you? >> i realize that's the media narrative you love to tell. it's worth noting in 2013 -- >> green eggs and ham. sen. cruz: i voted repeatedly to fund the government. in 2013, it was harry reid and the democrats who voted no, who voted not to shut the government down. just like this week. republicans voted to fund the

government and chuck schumer and that democrats voted to shut it down. >> bottom line, are shutdowns a good use of leverage or not? >> look we should not be shutting the government down. i have consistently opposed shutdowns. in 2013 i said we shouldn't shut the government down. indeed, i went to the senate floor repeatedly asking unanimous consent to reopen the government. >> you stood in the way of that. sen. cruz: that's factually incorrect. senator cruz: -- >> it's not though. sen. cruz: it's a wonderful media narrative. only one thing actually causes a shutdown. when you have senators who vote to to deny cloture on a funding bill. when that bill comes up and a yes means fund the government a no means don't fund the government. in 2013, virtually every single republican voted to fund the government including me, multiple times. the same thing is true now. virtually every -- in fact, i believe every single democrat voted to shut the government down. the same is true here. virtually every single republican voted this week to fund the government. virtually every single democrat voted to shut it down.

>> that's not the case. sen. cruz: which of those facts are incorrect? >> you insisted at that time -- sen. cruz: i get that you want to debate me but you done have -- you don't have any facts. host: your reaction to that exchange? [laughter] guest: i think you're going to see more of those type of exchanges. shutdowns are remembered. this one will be remembered. not as much as the last one because it was only a three-day shutdown, basically 2 1/2 days. ted cruz has political aspirations. remember, he's up for re-election in 2018. democrats would love to take him out. i think it's an uphill climb. i think also he's going to be running for president and this came up when he ran for president that certainly the polls showed that republicans lost that shutdown battle. host: for those listening on c-span radio, we're talking with bob cusack, editor in chief of "the hill" newspaper. trying to sort through the day's events. this statement from the white house by the president. "i am pleased that democrats in congress have come to their senses. once the government is funded,

my administration will work toward solving the problem of very unfair and illegal immigration. we will make a long-term deal law on immigration if and only if it is good for the country. guest: [chuckling] that's both senator mcconnell and senator schumer have been critical of the president. schumer said over the weekend that negotiating with trump is like negotiating with jell-o. mitch mcconnell said we need to figure out what the president stands for on this we've heard different things from the administration at different times. what's going to happen, the administration will have to spell out what they want clearly. host: more reaction from house members. we pointed out that congressman steve scalise is back on capitol hill. before we hear from him, he underwent surgery? guest: yes. this is multiple surgeries now. he said this was a plan he has made a remarkable recovery, his deputy, patrick mchenry, but key to whipping the house vote when -- was key to whipping the house

vote when they passed their budget bill, but scalise is now back. host: here's what the republican whip told reporters earlier. >> glad to be back. obviously a lot is going on here. want to come back to hopefully see us reopen the government. make sure we can pay our troops. i know it's been an interesting last few days. i've been staying in touch with the rest of the leadership team and my staff. but, i'm glad i was able to make it back for this part of finishing up this important work. >> without getting into the politics, left and right here, did this surprise you that it got to this point? >> it surprised me a little bit because the house got together to pass a clean c.a. and add the c.r. to keepean

the government funded and pay our troops, but we also added that ship bill which had -- the chip bill which had widespread support. this was a bill that ebb sured that for years we'll be able to fund the children's health insurance program which in many states was getting ready to run out of money. so, to see democrats who in the past used to praise those kinds of bills voting en masse against it did not make any sense. i don't think the country agreed with the tactics chuck schumer and the democrats were using. i am glad they realized it was time to come to their senses and get this bill passed. [indiscernible]

>> there were no commitments made in the house. in fact, we had a working group on immigration for long time but i think we have been very clear that any final solution has to include funding of the wall. we've been working closely with president trump on that. i am glad to see chuck schumer finally agreed with the president that the wall out to be funded. ultimately, we have got to see how all sides can come together and see if the senate can come together with something the president trump can support. i think there is a deal to be made but in my mind, it would not include amnesty and it has to include real border security and funding of the wall. host: congressman steve scalise, house republican whip. first of all, your reaction to what you heard from him? guest: no one is pro-amnesty and no one is pro-government shutdown. but what defines amnesty is a big question going forward. and the deal that they strike. and that is going to be a problem for steve scalise because any deal they strike, i think a deal could come out of the senate, but how do you bring it to the house floor when probably whatever deal to get that to the senate, if they get the deal out of the senate, how do you get the majority of the majority, which house publicans

-- republicans insist on? i think there's going to be the biggest test for house leadership, including steve scalise in the coming weeks. host: so it could pass the senate and then die in the house? guest: it could. that is one of the options. we are certainly seeing a lot more talks on bipartisan immigration proposals including , one from senator graham and one from senator durbin. host: explain the march 5 deadline for daca. guest: that's when the six months run out. depending on how the administration deals with it, there are some people saying that that is one deportations could occur. i think there could be leeway in date, it fends on what the enforcement of these dreamers who came here illegally but i think there could be some leeway in that date the can is i think it depends on what the enforcement of these dream her came here illegally, but people say they should stay. remember, democrats are pointing out that people are losing their status before march five. that is why the left is upset that they do not have anything

and they cannot wait another day to get the deal. host: we are joined by republican congressman mike kelly from pennsylvania. congressmen, i know it has been a busy couple of days. thank you for being here with us on c-span. let me begin with the immigration issue. if a bill does pass the senate, what are its chances in the house of representatives? kelly: it depends on what's in the bill. this cannot be a ride with a very small group of people. since i have been here, we have had a group of people working very hard on immigration reform. then so complicated and you get into this, will i can accept this, but i cannot accept that. we just talked about, how do you define amnesty and where does amnesty fit in? that is really a question that is going to be a sticking point. in terms of those here

now, there are different figures. maybe as many as 1.5 million. -- 700,000 children, maybe as many as 1.5 million. is there any sense that we could see any mass deportation? or will there be a compromise to keep those dreamers here in the u.s.? mr. kelly: i think the difference between the president when he was running as the candidate and then we he became president he has changed his view of the daca folks. i think the key is the enforcement. what do you enforce? when do you enforce? how stringent is the enforcement? there are a lot of us who understand that in some cases these are very young people. but they are here illegally. so you have got to look at what is it that makes sense? i believe that we have a president that has a very open mind and a person who looks at this and says let's make sure we're doing the right thing for the right reasons. this daca issue is the big issue but right now they are here illegally. i really wish that president obama had not done an end run, made an executive decision to do

this without the congress. i think president trump is clear, this is the responsibility of the congress, i want to see a fix come out of the congress he set the date of march 5. that's what we're working toward now. guest: congressman kelly, how do you fix this so we don't go from one deadline to another, could you envision a two-year budget down the road? mr. kelly: i think that makes the most sense of anything. as you know, i'm from the private sector. i don't know how people work on two and three-week budgets and try to figure there's a good end to this. the certainty of what it is you have to work with is critical to anybody running any kind of business. you have to have those things in place. the idea that we don't have to do it is to me is completely foreign. i have no idea how we got to this point. i would love to see a two-year budget you can look at, know where you're going, there's a clear path of what it is we have to defend and more importantly

, that the appropriations process takes place. that committee has the ability and has the responsibility to make sure that the 12 appropriation bills are done. then we send them over to the senate for their approval. we did that lester. unfortunately, the senate did not take up on them. i think if you are an appropriator, you begin to wonder why does this not go forward? we did all this work. that is a process. i wouldn't begin to criticize the senate, i wouldn't want to be in the senate, i love being in the house where things happen much more quickly. host: let me turn to bob cusack. guest: hey, congressman, i want to get your take, whatever deal is struck eventually, whether it's before the next deadline or not that it will be a dreamer deal and with some border security, maybe some wall funding but number one do you think it's essential that any type of deal like that will get a majority of the majority in the house and do you think that speaker ryan should commit to that publicly? mr. kelly: i think the president is clear. he wants to make a long-term deal on immigration.

but he wants to make sure it's really good for our country. and i do not think that is odd that the president of the united states would say, listen, i am open to these things as long as it is in the best interest of the american people and our great country. so whether speaker ryan or whomever it is that works on this, and the speakers working on all of these things and i think he has done a magnificent job navigating the last couple of days. look, we're going to have to come up with immigration reform. no question about that. how we get there, the details of it, right now it's up in the air. i would love to be able to sit in on that. i will have that opportunity but it is a complicated issue. as you know. and for anybody to say this is exactly the way it's going to be is -- that is something, you set parameters and think, this is the sticking point. these are the main point we was -- we have to achieve. what thecurity is

president talked about in his campaign. that's why the american people elected him. so he's saying very clearly, we get that border wall, get that border wall up, we protect the people of the united states and that's our main job. that's -- we take an issue, an oath to defend. and so i'm strong on doing that. the american people come first. then whatever comes after that, i'm fine, as long as it, again, fits within the grand scheme of what it is we're trying to get done. host: congressman kelly, one final point, i'm sure you saw this story, the pennsylvania supreme court ruling on congressional maps, i'm not sure it will affect the third congressional district but state lawmakers need to redraw maps in pennsylvania before this fall's elections. what are your thoughts? mr. kelly: we'll have something coming out very soon. our delegation did meet. there'll be a statement coming out from all of us in regards to that. host: congressman mike kelly, republican of pennsylvania, joining us on the phone. thank you for being with us. rep. kelly: thank you. host: "the hill" is reporting by

-- on a this decision on the state of pennsylvania, what impact do you think it's going to have? guest: i'm not sure what the next step would be. we have a pending case on redistricting at the supreme court. we have north carolina also had a recent ruling. so the big question is, when i go outside the beltway, there's a lot of talk, when you talk to average joe, they like the idea of term limits. president trump embraced that. now there's also some frustration at the gerrymandering that's gone on on both the democrat and republican sides. the question is, and i think this is just going to be decided by the courts, is this fair? is this the american way, that you have these gerrymandered districts that sometimes look like a pretzel to fit lawmaker's attempts to stay in office to have friendly voters, whether it's votes on the right or the left. host: we've been talking about the budget process, let me go back to what we chatted with congressman mike kelly in terms of fixing this long-term, not necessarily for this year but down the road.

does congress have the appetite and political willpower to do that? guest: i'm skeptical. you talked about a two-year budget deal which has attracted bipartisan support in the past but hasn't gotten enough support to be pushed over the finish line. i do think there is real exhaustion on capitol hill on appropriators, that the house appropriators are passing bill the senate can't take them up then you get this kind of mass fiscal showdown at the end. it seems like it's deja vu all over again. i think there's frustration but will that frustration lead to changes in the process? there are critics of the two-year budget idea. i just don't see it happening any time soon. >> this clearly will be an issue that plays out in the 2018 campaign. not the budget process, but that immigration issue. guest: right. mid-terms are usually about getting their base out, a deal on immigration is going to at least upset parts of both of

those bases without a doubt. the house is definitely in play. the senate, republicans have a friendly map where democrats are defending a lot of seats in trump country. but there's even a chance that democrats could win back the senate. but the house is where most political handicappers are kind of deciding. we've got a long way off. i don't think the individual shutdown will play any type of role in the election unless they're recurrent and they're happening again and again , because they can't get a deal on immigration. host: one final point, the issue of trust. it came up at today's white house briefing, sarah sanders , the press secretary, was asked about that between democrats and republicans. let's listen and get your reaction. >> bring republicans down here, bring the republicans here, hash it out, how is this going to be different? we didn't see him move over the weekend, he was only talking to republicans. obviously if there's going to be a deal by february 8, it needs to involve democrats. sarah: look, we have been very clear about what we want to see and any legislation.

and i do not think there is a whole lot of daylight between where we are and where the democrats are. we certainly want to negotiate and get to a place and we're hopeful we can do that and get to a place in the next couple weeks. host: from today's white house briefing with sarah huckabee sanders. joining us on the phone is the principal deputy white house press secretary, thank you for being with us. you with us? >> thank you for having me on. host: let me ask you first about the president's involvement. a lot of questions at today's briefing. we didn't see him, we saw some pictures, but what was he doing over the last three days in the shutdown? >> the president was really engaged on two fronts. he was making sure that the government, while being shut down, was not going to have a huge impact.

so over the weekend, he dealt with the omb director mick mulvaney to make sure the impact of the shutdown would be minimal on paychecks. that we can keep national parks open, provide basic services. he was talking to leader mccarthy and paul ryan and the house, senator mcconnell and cornyn and the senate. his message was for a clear that, you know, the offer that had been made to senate democrats was a very reasonable one. that, you know, having a continuing resolution for several weeks that included chip funding, that included, you know, that delay in taxes on a bipartisan basis, deserve their support and they could continue negotiations and he was to not give essentially and say, we are going to reopen discussions on immigration before we reopen the government. it was a key part of what the president was doing of the weekend, making sure that we were going to hold the line.

take a firm position. understand that democrats are going to try to wiggle their way out of it. that there be a before we would start negotiation. >> is there a level of trust between senator durbin, senator schumer, and the president? >> i don't think there is a great deal of trust right now. he had a conversation with the president on friday afternoon or mid-morning and walked out and proceeded to mischaracterize the details of that conversation. making claims and deals that were not accurate. that does not help the situation. he is also the senate minority leader. we will work with him to give the government open after this instance and on a bipartisan basis on a whole host of issues.

i will be candid. i do not think the events of the last 72 hours helped senator schumer's cause of being dealmaker with this white house. >> joining us from the white house, bob cusack is here, the editor in chief of the hill newspaper. >> i think it is pretty remarkable over the last hours. that he would exchange dreamers for the wall. senator schumer said he has put that on the table. do you think that that was really not the case weeks and months ago -- do you think the chances of the wall getting approved with funding are rising >>nificantly this year ago -- ago. >> we think so.

we think these democrats now understand that when we had a meeting two weeks ago in the cabinet room where a bipartisan group said we're going to talk about four issues, it wasn't just daca, but border security and the wall, ending the visa lottery and reforms to the extended family chain migration system. those are necessary when you look at daca, right. because the issue is that if you are sympathetic, and the president does want to find a responsible solution, but if you give them legal status, you encourage more parents to come over a porous border with minors. we don't want a situation three, five, 10 years from now where hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants have been brought here that we now have to try to give more legal protections to. so by not securing the border, but not providing reforms to chain migration and ending the visa lottery systeming we're going to run into that problem again. so the president wants to fix it. i think the democrats understand now that the president is serious when he says he wants to

fix the problems and not kick the can down the road solution. and hopefully we can come together and, you know, and come to some sort of solution. i will say the remarks by congressman gutierrez and some of the things said by senator schumer he claim head said in the oval office are helpful and i think are a big piece of the border security. host: let me take that one step further then. if the democrats agree to funding for the wall and we heard the figure $18 billion, that's what hogan gidley said the administration is asking for, if that's there, could you see them agreeing to a path to citizenship to keep dreamers in the u.s. without repercussions? >> those are two, significant,

very important pieces to the puzzle. i do think right now that our view is two other issues, ending the visa lottery system, which i think there's bipartisan backing for and democrats voted to end it in 013, and also some reforms looking at the extended family chain migration system and moving us more toward a merit-based system. those are our priorities in this negotiation. you know, i'm sure there might be some flexibility on some of the terms. probably some on the democrat side as well. but i think you have the contours of a deal. host: one final point, the president was scheduled to leave for davos, switzerland, on wednesday, what's the status of the trip? >> i think it's more likely than not now that the shutdown vote happened in the senate but i don't have any announcements right now. we hope to make that trip happen. host: raj shah, the principal deputy press secretary. thank you for joining us. bob cusack, final thoughts? guest: stay tuned. this is going to be an intense battle. with an intense timeline,

getting a deal. the bottom line is you've seen one shutdown in 2018, you may see at least one more. host: really? guest: yeah, i think. and the next one could be the big one. this was just a fight over a timeline basically and some other things attached to the bill the next one is the actual heavy lifting. host: bob cusack, editor in chief of "the hill" newspaper, his work and that of his colleagues is at thehill.com. thank you for being with us. you're listening and watching c-span's "washington today." >> where are you from? go ahead. come here. come here. where are you from? >> like, the moment itself, i described at the time and still describe it as a bizarre moment. i was surprised when he called me other but he's the president of the united states and you're in the oval office so if he says who are you, come over here, you don't really have an option. announcer: irish journalist katrina perry talks about

covering president trump and his supporters for the irish media during and after the 2016 presidential election season. in her book "in america." >> drain the swamp, three words is incredibly evocative and it does what it says on the tin. you know immediately kind of what he is talking about. playing on that notion that washington, d.c., was built on a swap. by drinking it, -- by draining it, taking those horrible people that live there and replacing them with better people. that was something that whether voters believed him or not, believed to could fulfill or not, they were prepared to take a chance on it. announcer: sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. host: welcome back to "washington today." on wall street, markets reacting to the news on today's deal reopening the government. dow moving ahead 143 points. nasdaq up 72. the s&p up 22 1/2.

some of the headlines come of those massive are storms which swept through california's wine country last october have state legislatures considering a major overhaul to emergency alert measures. the goal is to deliver more timely alert warnings, reaching not to television and radio stations but also smart phones and other digital devices. the fires hitting four northern california counties, claiming 44 lives. and montana's democratic governor signed an executive order that requires all internet service providers with state contracts to abide by the neutrality and spoils. -- by net neutrality principles. steve bollocks state the first one to push back on the decision to repeal open internet roles from last month. c-span's "the communicators" looks at this issue, it airs every saturday 6:30 p.m. eastern time on c-span and any time at c-span.org. more from the senate today and the c.r. that will keep the government in operation through february 8. here is the chair of the senate

intelligence committee, richard burr of north carolina, on the intelligence provisions in that c.r. >> mr. president, the vice-chairman of the intelligence committee and i were notified when the house cr appeared that there is language in it that was different than in the past. and, the language is in section 148 of the cr. it is of concern to the intelligence committee. let me just read the language. section 140 eight, funds appropriated by the department of defense missile defense and events and has been active 2018, division b of public law 115-90 six, may be obligated and expended without -- excuse me, notwithstanding section 504 of the national security act of 1947.

now, the language is troublesome for the committee because it would authorize the intelligence community to spend funds not withstanding the law that requires prior authorization by the senate intelligence committee or by the house intelligence committee. now, the vice-chairman and i are on the floor, i think last week and we had a 65-34 vote to reauthorize the most significant intelligence told to keep america safe. in did not debate, both senator warner and myself said to our opposition that we would do everything within the committee's power to make sure that we did aggressive, real-time oversight over the entire intelligence community. host: from the senate floor earlier today.

senator richard burr in a part of the debate that did not get a lot of attention but an important part. the vice chair and ranking democrat of the committee is senator mark warner. warner: being on the committee at least until recently had not been all that high attention-getting. we spent hundreds and hundreds of hours every month in a skiff. one of the things i find so rewarding about the intelligence committee's work is on issue after issue, you could not tell who was a democrat and republican. we'll take it in extraordinary seriously. if this exemption is granted, you could potentially have any administration go off and take on covert activities. for example, with no ability of our committee to say wait a minute. we actually disagree with that policy.

so i've been very disturbed by the whole process and how this got attempted to get slipped in. i as well as the chairman, no member would choose to object. if they do choose to object, hope they will be able to explain to the american public why they would want to remove the intelligence committees ability to monitor and then, if we make a decision, withdraw funding if we do not agree and have that ongoing tool, one of the most key components of our oversight responsibility, why they would want to give any administration a blank check. again, my hope would be that no one will object to this request that we will continue the policies that have existed for as long as i've been on the committee and those of us on the committee will continue to take the responsibility of oversight very, very seriously and continue in a bipartisan way.

>> mark warner, democratic senator from virginia. the house tonight in the senate earlier today will be had on a bill that will reopen the government officially tonight and tomorrow. the senate vote was 81-18. how did we get to this point? a question often asked by reporters on capitol hill including casey hunt to governor's consent delaware. >> can you talk to the camera? how did this happen? >> i want to give a lot of credit to bipartisan working group of more than 20 senators that steadily built over the last 48 hours, who listened to each other, respected to each other, talk not just about how to get agreement to reopen that government but how to get a pathway toward resolving some of our most dysfunctional aspects of the senate. how to get the appropriate -- the appropriations process working again. fully funding our domestic

needs. addressing opioids. addressing community health centers. we have a big menu of things that are not resolved. >> did you trust mitch mcconnell to follow through? >> leader mcconnell made a clear commitment. we are not going to be able to move forward if we do not trust each other so i'm going to trust the that leader mcconnell will keep his commitment and that we now have a window of opportunity where this group has to show that it can work together and build a bipartisan consensus that produces a product worthy of time on the senate floor. >> washington post put it this way, senate democrats going to pressure to rip the government joining republicans in immigration and spending him for my son was quickly denounced by liberals and immigration activist. roughly 60 hours after the federal governments for shutdown, the bipartisan group of negotiators in the senate to build with leadership trading support for reopening the government for a commitment by

republicans to hold about resolving the status of young, undocumented immigrants by mid-february. senator jeff flake is a republican from arizona. he is stepping down after one term this year. he was also asked questions by nbc's casey hunt. >> how did this happen? >> what? >> the deal. how did you get here? mr. flake: three days of talking, i guess. basically, friday what we started with was basically what we ended with but just a firmer commitment then we had initially. >> did you promise to hold mcconnell's feet to the fire on this? mr. flake: well, we did talk to democrats and we feel we have a commitment and i did go back to the leader's office and said stronger language would be up fall and he did give stronger language on the floor today,

particularly about the fairness of the process. you know, in terms of picking a bill and how the motion to proceed would work. that was convincing to the democrats. >> do trust mitch mcconnell? mr. flake: i do feel that a command like this today with such fanfare for what will happen three weeks from now, i think we can count on it. >> compromises back? mr. flake: i hope so. we had these meetings in mcconnell's office with a growing number of people and it was very good to see. it will be nice to see actually if we have a process on the center or the we have done had for long time really sense, you know, like the bipartisan immigration bill that we did before where we went through regular order and dealt with amendments and everybody had their say. this will be much like that. host: senator jeff flake, republican of arizona. vice president mike pence in israel.

this headline from the wall street journal, the vice president saying the u.s. will open an embassy in jerusalem next year. he also signaled support for the resumption of peace talks with the palestinians. here is the vice president. >> 70 years ago, the vice -- the united states was proud to be the first nation in the world to recognize the state of israel. as you all know, the work week began on that day was left unfinished. for while the united states recognized for nation, the one administration after another refused to recognize your capital. just last month, president donald trump made history. you write in the 70-you're wrong. he kept his word to the american people when he announced that the united states of america will finally acknowledge jerusalem is israel's capital. [applause]

vice president pence: the jewish people's unbreakable bond to the sacred city reaches back more than three dozen years. it was here in jerusalem, riot that abraham offered his son, isaac, and was credited with righteousness with his belief in god. it was here in jerusalem the king david consecrated that capital of the kingdom of israel and since its rebirth, the modern state of israel is called the city at the seat of its government. jerusalem is israel's capital and as such, president trump has directed the state department to immediately begin preparations to move the united states embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem. [applause] host: vice president mike pence

in israel earlier today. and finally on this day in history, january 22, 1973, cbs evening news anchor walter cronkite reporting on the death of our 36th president, lyndon baines johnson. 36thesident johnson, the president united states who served from the time of president kennedy's assassination in 1963 until 1969, when president nixon succeeded him, has died. he died of a heart attack. he had been suffering from heart ailments from some time. he had two serious previous heart attacks, one as recently as a couple of months ago. he had been back at his ranch, though, and there seem to be reasonably good health in recent weeks. he had been up and around. he had not been bedridden and anyway and he was stricken this -- afternoon at

3:40 p.m. this afternoon. he died shortly thereafter apparently despite the best efforts of three secret service men at the scene who gave him every emergency aid they could. host: january 22, 1973. the death of president lyndon johnson announced by walter cronkite. we're back tomorrow morning, live simulcast of c-span's washington journal here on c-span radio. announcer: c-span's washington journal, live every day with policies that impact you. how the diminishing role of facts and analysis in public life threatens policymaking. joining us is jennifer. and then some of the challenges facing the national park service. also, the latest on resolving the government shutdown. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal." join the discussion.

>> c-span we're history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and is brought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. >> after three days of uncertainty, the government shutdown came to an end after congress approved and short-term spending bill to fund the government through february 8. and also included a six-year authorization of the children's health insurance program. the spending bill was first approved by the senate with the help of democrats, who acted with the understanding that the republicans would do with -- would address immigration in the next few weeks. we look at how the day unfolded, beginning with remarks by senate leaders mitch mcconnell and charles schumer.