joining us to talk about a new report highlighting ways to improve nutrition assistance programs in the united states. newsmakers is next. thanks for joining us. we're back tomorrow morning. have a great week ahead. ♪ >> next, "newsmakers," with john of the, ranking member budget committee. then a senate hearing on school safety. later, we will show you remarks by president trump and secretary of state rex tillerson concerning the president decision to replace the secretary.

>> "newsmakers" is pleased to welcome this week congressman john yarmuth, the only democrat congressionaly delegation. he represents louisville and is the ranking democrat on the budget committee. congress has another deadline spending. as folks who follow congress know, this is the fifth stopgap measure. kristina peterson from "the washington journal" is up first. christina: how confident are you will see an omnibus spending bill passed next week? well, i'mth: moderately confident, which is probably all you can be in this day and age. i think most of the problems are being resolved, but there's still some pretty significant , as inding issues

understand it. i think there is a possibility you could get a short-term continued resolution, maybe a week or so, what i think -- actually, it would not be a week because of easter break and passover and spring break, so it would probably be three weeks, but i do not think there is any threat of a government shutdown. >> could you tell us a little bit about these last final sticking points and where you think those are headed? most of these are really policy questions rather than funding questions. there are significant differences over some of the requests from republicans to for ice agents and other interior immigration enforcement mechanisms. that is a sticking point. there are significant issues left with regard to women's reproductive rights that republicans want to defund --

planned parenthood and other related issues that have yet to be negotiated. there are some problems. we democrats would still like to dreamersca fix for the . probably not going to happen, but these are negotiations that are taking place. the reason we have some leverage is because it's unlikely that republicans can muster 218 votes sopass these spending bills, they will have to negotiate with democrats. again, i think a lot of progress has been made over the last few days, but there's still a way to go. >> can i ask you -- last year into this year, democrats were saying they were going to use these spending bills as moments to force the president and republicans to take action on daca, take action on some of these democratic priorities that bipartisan support. here we are pushing another

deadline. you just said yourself it is unlikely to happen. what happened, and why were democrats not able to get any results on that? rep. yarmuth: the first time we tried to do it, the government was shut down for a few days, and i think everyone realized there was probably an equal amount of blame being spread around, and that would probably never be ineffective. what we did was start negotiating on other things, mostly the spending level, and -- at leastl we had my opinion was, and i think it was shared by most of the democratic caucus -- was that we got 80% of what we were trying to get, and if you cannot accept 80%, then the system cannot function.

it hasn't solved the problem by any stretch of the imagination because we still have a number todreamers who are hesitant renew their applications because they don't want to go on the record as to where they are and subject themselves to deportation, assuming the courts do not reverse the president. it is a tough situation. i think we do have some breathing room. probably nine to 12 months. there will be other opportunities, but i don't want anyone to have the idea this is still not one of the top priorities of the democratic caucus in both the house and senate. this is something we care deeply about. one other issue i want to raise that democrats have been talking deeply about another issue where there is some bipartisan consensus but no will to action on gun laws. next saturday, we will potentially have tens of thousands, perhaps more kids and

parents and allies coming to washington to march for new gun laws. do you see any appetite among democrats to force any action as part of this bill, and what do you tell those kids who are coming to washington about the democratic resolved to force action here? that wemuth: i think have done virtually everything , even innow how to do taking over the floor of the house in the summer of 2016 and trying to shut the place down in order just to get a vote. it has been very, very frustrating. we try to use our position and all the tools available to us. nothing has worked yet. i do not think that a spending bill is an appropriate place for that, but at some point, -- the reason daca became such an important issue with the

spending bills was because we had deadlines. that is not true of gun violence legislation, but we are going to keep pushing for this. the caucus talks about it every week. this next week, i'm going to start wearing a button with a f on it, which represents my rating from the national rifle association. arele who understand it proud of having those ratings. we think that is a badge of honor, and i hope a lot of my colleagues will wear them as well. .t's very exasperating i think, however, that these young people are going to make a difference because not only are they passionate and brilliant and articulate, but they are of -- i think they taken this debate out of

the partisan environment, and that, ultimately, will make a difference. ms. peterson: do you think we will ever see a change in the dynamic around gun legislation unless there are electoral consequences for members of either party? do you see that happening in this year's midterms at all? actually talked to a group the other day because we going to have a march here in louisville on the 24th as well, and talking to the organizers of that march, a difference on this issue is going to come whatever millennials and whatever this generation now is called, when they start voting in the same , upentages as older voters in the 45%, 50% to 60% range. there will be change because there will be electoral consequences. ms. peterson: do you think those caucus sequences -- do you think

those consequences will favor democrats? rep. yarmuth: definitely they will favor democrats, but i think they will also favor significant changes to our gun violence agenda. i thought we would move more into your legislative wheelhouse here and budget and the school matters. obviously, democrats are not in . position to pass a budget you certainly have put forth priorities. seen on what we have politically over the last few months and certainly in the last week in pennsylvania, i think there is a growing expectation that democrats may be in position to take back the house next year. if that is, in fact, the case, what do you see for the fiscal ? ture for the federal budget

under a democratic house, what would a budget look like? would it balance, and how would it differ from the republican priorities we have seen over the past -- well, in the house now, several years. for thatuth: thanks question. a couple of things i am very confident of -- one is you would see a lot more attention paid to the revenue side of the budget. we would look very carefully at the trillion dollars a year in tax expenditures, many of which provide no public benefit. i think we would review the new be aaw, and it would significant number of changes there. we have already seen just in the last few days announcements from the treasury as to how much the deficit has increased just in the last couple of months, and it's largely due to a reduction in revenue. republicans while they have been in charge have looked exclusively not just at the

expense side of the budget but pretty much just at the domestic expense side, and we would be looking, i think, much more carefully at the defense budget and things like the operations account, which is kind of a slush fund, and i think we would a looking very carefully at lot of the programs that represent significant investments in our future economy on the education side in job training, in research, and in infrastructure. would be a very different approach to what we have seen over the last six years. mr. debonis: correct me if i'm wrong, but you have then an advocate in the past particularly on health care, looking at a single-payer type program, a more aggressive national healthcare system. do you think that given the

fiscal attacks that democrats have levied on republicans after their tax bill, that that could be done in a responsible and frankly not hypocritical manner now that democrats have been lambasting republicans for the deficit they created in their tax bill? rep. yarmuth: i think you will see over the next few months. i would bet a significant majority of our democratic congressional candidates across the country will be talking about medicare for everyone. i think if we are able to take over the majority, we will see a series of hearings in the house to actually analyze the feasibility of medicare for everyone. one of the things i think is kind of crazy looking at what happened over the last few months is every time republicans do something to sabotage the affordable care act, they are basically making single-payer or medicare for everyone that much

more inevitable and that much closer. if you eliminate, as they have done, the individual mandate -- there are proposals to eliminate -- theyoyer mandate basically returned us almost as closely as possible to the situation prior to the four double care act, which was and will be a disaster and will absolutely rampant the pressure for the only alternative there is to the affordable care act, and that is medicare for everyone. i do not think that is a horrible scenario. payments have been inflicted on many people in my area and others because of these a chance to sabotage the aca, but i think it will force us to consider a real option, and that is medicare for all. ms. peterson: can you mention cost care reductions, some cities that were going to insurance companies to help low

income users afford coverage -- where is the thinking on renewing those now? president trump had ended them, and there was a discussion about putting them in the omnibus. is that something democrats want to do at this point? i think democrats would love to see some measures taken to help shore up the exchanges and the interval -- individual insurance markets. i think it's critical and if republicans are willing to do that, they will have our support. i think we need to be convinced they are serious about that, and i think a few of them are, but you cannot let these insurance because in many places, you are just going to dramatically increase the number of uninsured, and able then be going to hospitals who will treat them without any compensation. you will jeopardize the financial status of many of the ,ural hospitals in particular and you will just precipitate significant ripples of crisis.

personally, and i know our leadership feels the same way, we hope republicans are serious about trying to do some things, particularly cost-sharing reductions that would help shore up those markets. that hasson: it seems been a lot of debate on the hill recently about if abortion restrictions should be included in those subsidies. where do things stand on that front? there is a law that prohibits taxpayer dollars ,rom being spent for abortions and i am really kind of exasperated with republican attempts to do something that will have no impact. i am primarily concerned about defunding planned parenthood because the vast majority of what planned parenthood does is to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and the potential need for an abortion, so i don't know what the thinking of republicans is. i know this is pretty much a

messaging device, but it's frustrating they keep bringing this back up. i am a former board member of planned parenthood, and the vast majority of customers and patience of planned parenthood rely on planned parenthood as their only health care provider. they get screened for cervical cancer and breast cancer and also its of other potential problems. it is cruel and unwise, and they have tried this before. the senate,er pass so it's a silly attempt of theirs, and they ought to just get down to doing the things that will keep the government open for another five months, and then we can debate it again for fiscal year 2019. >> about 10 minutes left. electionis: to turn to politics of little bit, you mentioned a lot of democratic

candidates this year will be running on more progressive platforms, calling for things whatmedicare for all, but we saw earlier this week in pennsylvania -- a lot of people are looking at the results and seeing the campaign that the democratic candidate ran and taking a lesson that democrats, at least in some of these districts, should be running more moderate campaigns, running more 20 center. what lessons do you take from what happened in pennsylvania and what sort of message do you think democrats will have moving on? rep. yarmuth: i think the lesson is donald trump is toxic and republicans are demoralized. the campaign that conor lamb ran -- i think it's amazing that people are saying he ran as a republican win a week ago, they beingriticizing him for too liberal. the republican tax

plan, call for universal background checks on one purchases. wasaid unabashedly he pro-choice. security,about social medicare, medicaid, and resisting attempts to cut those. i think he ran on a pretty progressive agenda, but my personal position, and that are a lot of people who do not agree with me on this -- i think this campaign is going to be a very visceral campaign. i think this election will be very visceral in the sense that people are totally anxious and freaked out by everything happening with this administration. they want security. ,hey want some kind of normalcy and i think this election will not be decided on issues. ms. peterson: what parallels to --mr. debonis: what parallels do you see with this election and the year you first were elected

when george w. bush was very unpopular? do you see the same atmosphere or perhaps even more troublesome for the president? rep. yarmuth: i don't really see the same parallels. i don't think george w. bush was personally unpopular. his policies were. the war in afghanistan and iraq had turned sour. that was a very significant issue. the administration had passed in 2001 and 2003 had caused a significant deficit, there were more policy implications there and fewer personal ones. to a certain extent, the country was still traumatized by 9/11 when we ran in 2006, and i think there was a national angst, but it's a little bit different than, i think, the atmosphere right now. in all of these movements that have arisen, the

individual movement, me too, black lives matter, the kids with the guns -- there is a common thread, and that is that isple have decided that it only through their energy that change is going to be infected -- change is going to be effe cted. they're taking to the streets in all these areas, and they had a common belief that the only way to effect change and get the changethey want is to the majorities in congress or state legislatures or wherever it may be. i think the atmosphere is different than it was in 2006. ms. peterson: one of the more notable elements of the lamb campaign was that he directly said he opposed house minority leader nancy pelosi. do you think we will see that strategy replicated by more democrats across the country, and what does that mean for the minority leader's stature?

does that we can her in any way? rep. yarmuth: i do not think that issue has much traction anymore. it did not seem to move any voters, and it did not seem to energize any voters. while i think you will see some candidates try to distance themselves from leader pelosi, i do not think that will be an issue that is at all pivotal in this campaign. in terms of her future, we will see what happens. think she as well as steny hoyer and jim clyburn understand that they have been around a long time and they have taken some to kind of elevate newer members in different areas, and i think they see the light at the end of the tunnel , but whatcareers would be interesting to see -- and i have not heard to a people

talk about this -- is they need to hundred 18 votes on the floor to elect a speaker, so if we end up getting a majority, it could be a very interesting election as people try to assemble 218 votes. she got about 130 votes for minority leader, and there were for jim ryan. it would be interesting to see, particularly if you have a lot of candidates pledging not to vote for her. the most important thing is what gets us in the majority, and i againstink campaigning nancy pelosi is going to be effective. we -- if we will continue to see candidates standing up declaring they will as thisort nancy pelosi campaign cycle goes on, does that sort of force the issue with the minority leader?

should she have to consider if she needs to sort of make a decision about her future? my guess is she is constantly evaluating her future. she constantly evaluates just about everything. she is a pretty savvy leader and savvy politician. i hope it is a problem we have as to who the next speaker will be, but i think that is going to be something she will have to deal with at that time, if, in fact, there are 40 new members and a lot of them have said they would not vote for her for speaker, that would be problematic. we will see how it unfolds. again, i would hope people, at least on the democratic side, do nancympaign against pelosi because i do not think it is an issue that is going to make much difference, and there

are a lot more important things they can talk about, like the problems with the republican tax plan and the way republicans have sabotaged the health care system in this country. i think voters want to hear about that more than they want to hear about nancy pelosi. ms. peterson: if you had to place if that today, do you think democrats take back the house, and how confident are you? rep. yarmuth: i am getting more and more confident every day. i would place a bet that we would take the majority back. i think if the election were held today, i could see us 40 seats. to we need to win 24 -- well, now, , although we lamb have not inaugurated him, so it's actually still 24. i think the election will be an overwhelming victory for democrats. the energy that i see, and i travel around kentucky a fair amount since i'm the only democrat, there are democrats

who want to be engaged -- everywhere i go, every event i go to, there's a record crowd, and they say there are many, many new people coming to these events, and i seen the same thing across the river in indiana, and my colleagues have seen the same thing just about everywhere. energy we are the seeing on our side is going to dissipate between now and november, and i do not feel there is much on the republican side that will give them energy, so i'm very confident. do you see yourself having any company in the kentucky delegation come january? i know there's a big push for congressman andy barr's seat. rep. yarmuth: i think we are going to win the sixth district. we have three really good candidates, and i think the front runners jim gray. the mayor is very popular in that district.

amen the graph, an air force pilot who made such a splash when she did her introductory video, and then reggie thomas, an african-american state senator, very high-quality candidate, so i think we are going to have a great competitive candidate in that district. there are some interesting possibilities. i think it's highly unlikely districtsf the other will end up being competitive, but we've got some really interesting candidates. one in hal rogers' district, which is largely appalachian. he think there's a lot of satisfaction to dissatisfaction with how rogers, who has been there a long time. we have some pretty interesting candidate running against guthrie in the second district. that is a real long shot, but again, anything could happen .his year

the dynamics in many places are kind of uncharted. we will see. i'm hopeful. i love company. taping this on friday morning, we have just gotten word that longtime democratic congresswoman louise slaughter passed away due to applications from a fall. you have no her for a long time. do you want to say anything? louise.muth: i love we knew she had hit her head or something and was having some problems. i'm so sorry she has passed. she is a native kentucky and. we share most of the commonwealth and a love of congress. that's a tragic loss for the congress. >> daily democrat on the house rules committee, a very familiar figure.

head democrat on the house rules committee, a very familiar democrat. thank you for being with us. many have said democrats do not have the energy after the last standoff to be really an opposition to this spending bill. did pennsylvania change that at all? i don't think we're seeing that necessarily. the fight at this point -- they are looking to have those fights in the balance of the spending and on things like abortion homeland security -- they're just does not seem to be the bandwidth or the strategic desire to try and get into democrats feel liker dacaso i k

the spending bill accomplishes a lot of the priorities, make it increases in funding for domestic agencies, for the bulk of the democrats that is good enough, that is a win. they will take it and move on and fight the battles going into the midterms, knowing they have an advantage and press the advantage. i do not think that the election results change anything the way that the bill will pay out. host: the large spending increases and the budget plan that was proposed or passed, the republicans, especially the fiscally conservative ones are restless about it, so how many democrats are needed to get this passed? ms. peterson: we are in an unusual situation where everybody is confident that this could pass, but it could be close because he will have conservative republicans who say this is way too much spending and he will have democrats who

are still unhappy daca is not resolved. it will come down to the whips getting an exact count. it could be very narrow in the house, in the senate it probably is not as tight. last time around we saw senator rand paul create some suspense with the timing, and they did miss the deadline, so we could have drama there. but ultimately i think they wanted both parties, it will draw from the center of both. host: you both noted this is the last major march, the last piece of legislation to pass before the congressional elections. how does that change the dynamic? starting with mike. mr. debonis: anybody who wants to get something done before november is trying to get it in this bill. that ranges from immigration, if there is still a push to try to do something on daca, but it is things like fixes to the tax

bill, a number of things and play there, and kristi noem from south dakota trying to get that provision for sales tax added to the bill, people are trying to get the bank operating again, all these mini sites that -- fights that have been playing in the background. they are also it is engaged in trying to get some momentum to get it on the bill and those are some of the things we will be watching. ms. peterson: the one caveat i would add is we expect things to get sleepy before the midterms, there is always a possibility of more cabinet shakeups. we have two new nominees that have to be confirmed in the senate quite just from this last week. there is legislation we know is coming, but we have unpredictability coming from the white house the could have repercussions on the help. -- on the hill.

host: as a set, it is only march. thank you for being here. the timetable with the break for the spinning on the bill is what the spending on the bill is when? mr. debonis: by friday. ms. peterson: they have a two-week recess. host: the deadline great pressure or -- ms. peterson: they need deadlines on capitol hill. they need pressure to get anything done. they would be the first to tell you that. host: we will see with the week ahead brings for us. thank you for being on the program. thanks to you both. announcer: tonight on c-span, colorado college professor tom cronin talks about his book "imagining a great republic." >> i think a reading of major american political classics is

very empowering in terms of this country stands for something very special and the great writers like stone and all of these people, it is a reminding, they are storytellers saying that we want to be something special. not just the city on the hill, but a city that cares and loves one another and is willing to work with one another and understand that politics is indispensable to bring about progress for as much people as possible. announcer: tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. students from around the country are taking part in the march for our lives rally, calling on loawmakers to take action against gun violence in schools. we will have coverage starting at noon eastern on c-span.

now a senate judiciary committee hearing on school safety. witnesses include the father of a student who died in the parkland high school attack, and a teacher who sheltered in place with her students during the shooting. this is three hours and 40 minutes. [crowd noise] sen. grassley: we welcome you to a very important oversight hearing. we're here this morning to discuss another national tragedy and reflect on the loss of 17 innocent lives. the february 14th, 2018, attack on marjory stoneman douglas high school