intellectual architecture for all of that. that is the field of information theory. that is the field in a very real sense claude shannon invents. >> monday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. >> newsmakers is pleased to welcome john yarmuth, the only member of the kentucky delegation that represents logo. and also ranking member of the budget committee. congress has a deadline on march 23. negotiations are underway. this is the fifth stopgap measure. we will find out what the prospects are with christina pearson of the wall street journal and mike dibona. >> how confident are you we will see an omnibus spending bill passed next week? rep. yarmuth: well, i'm

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 outstanding issues, as i understand it. i think there is a possibility you could get a short-term continuing resolution, maybe a week or so, what i think -- actually, it would not be a week because we are on 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. ms. peterson: could you tell us a little bit about these last final sticking points and where you think those are headed? rep. yarmuth: most of these are really policy questions rather than funding questions. although they do involve funding. there are significant differences over some of the requests from republicans to bolster funding for detention beds and 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. so there are some problems. ,we obviously -- we democrats would still like to have a daca fix for the dreamers. probably not going to happen, but these are negotiations that are taking place. of course the reason we have some leverage is because it's unlikely that republicans can muster 218 votes to pass these spending bills, so 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. mr. debonis: 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 do have some bipartisan support. here we are pushing another deadline. you just said yourself it is unlikely to happen. what happened to their, -- what happened there, 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 would be effective. what we did was start negotiating on other things, mostly the spending level, and and in the last deal we had -- at least my opinion was, and i think it was shared by most of the democratic caucus -- was that we got about 80% of what we were trying to get, and if you can't accept 80%, then the system can't function.

the court decisions that have delayed the effectiveness of president trump's religion of the daca program -- resending of the daca program hasn't solved the problem by any stretch of the imagination because we still have a number of dreamers who are hesitant to renew their dreamer 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. waiting for the court. there will be other opportunities for us to step forward but i don't want anyone , to have the idea this is still not one of the very top priorities of the democratic caucus in both the house and senate. this is something we care deeply about. mr. debonis: 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 is 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 sort of 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? rep. yarmuth: i think that we have done virtually everything that we know how to do, even in 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 have tried to start positions that petitions -- tried to start

petitions 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. i'm going to unveil something 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. people who understand it are 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. it's very exasperating. i think, however, that these young people are going to make a

difference. they are going to make a difference because not only are they passionate and brilliant and articulate, but they are also not partisan. i think they have succeeded in taking 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? rep. yarmuth: i 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, i said the difference on this issue is going to come whatever millennials and whatever this generation now is called, when though students's generation and the millennials start voting in the same percentages as older

voters, up in the 45%, 50% to 60% range. then there will be change because there will be electoral consequences. ms. peterson: do you think those consequences will favor democrats? rep. yarmuth: definitely they will favor democrats, but i think they will favor significant additions to our gun violence agenda. mr. debonis: i thought we would move more into your legislative wheelhouse here in budget and and fiscal matters. obviously, democrats are not in a position to pass a budget. but you certainly have put forth priorities. based on what we have seen 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 future 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? rep. yarmuth: thanks for that question. i think 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 tax law, and there would be a significant number of changes there. we have already seen just in the last few days announcements from the treasury as to how much the

-- how much the deficit has increased just in the last couple of months, and it's largely due to a reduction in revenue. the 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 overseas contingencies account which is kind of a slush , fund, and i think we would be looking very carefully at a lot of the programs that represent significant investments in our future economy on the education side in job training, in , research, and in infrastructure. i think it 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

for -- particularly on health care, looking at a single-payer type program, a more aggressive national health care 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 deficits 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, you 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 the employer mandate -- they and in the reinsurance program, the cost-sharing reductions they , basically returned us almost as closely as possible to the situation prior to the affordable 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. so i do not think that is a , horrible scenario. i hate to see the pain inflicted on many people in my state, as well as many others because of these efforts the sabotage the aca.

again, i think it will force us to consider the real option and that is medicare for all. ms. peterson: can you mention -- you mentioned cost-sharing reductions, some cities that -- cost-sharing reductions, subsidies 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? rep. yarmuth: i think democrats would love to see some measures taken to help shore up the exchanges and the individual insurance markets. i think it's critical. 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 can't let these insurance markets collapse because in many places you are just going to dramatically increase the number of uninsured. they will then be going to

hospitals who will treat them without any compensation. you will jeopardize the financial status of many of the rural 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 and reinsurance that would help shore up those markets. ms. peterson: it seems that has been a lot of debate on the hill recently about whether abortion restrictions should be included in those subsidies. where do things stand on that front? rep. yarmuth: there is a law that prohibits taxpayer dollars from being spent for abortions, and i am really kind of exasperated with republican attempts to do something that will have no impact. but 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 patients of planned parenthood rely on planned parenthood as their only health care provider. they get screened for cervical cancer and breast cancer and all sorts of other potential problems. to me it is cruel and unwise, and they have tried this before. if they put it in the house it , would never pass the senate, 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 2019. 'susan about 10 minutes left. : mr. debonis: to turn to election politics of little bit, you mentioned a lot of democratic candidates this year will be running on more progressive platforms, calling for things like medicare for all, but what we saw earlier this week in pennsylvania -- a lot of people are looking at the result there and seeing the campaign that the democratic candidate conor lamb ran and taking a lesson that democrats, at least in some of these districts, should be running more moderate campaigns, running more towards the center. what lessons do you take from what happened in pennsylvania and what sort of message do you think democrats will have moving -- will have the most excess running on? rep. yarmuth: i think the lesson in pennsylvania was very simple. donald trump is toxic and the republicans are demoralized. the campaign that conor lamb ran

-- i think it's amusing that republicans are saying he ran as hen a week ago w they were criticizing him for being a pelosi liberal. he criticized the republican tax plan, call for universal background checks on one purchases. he said unabashedly he was pro-choice. he talked about preserving social security, medicare, and 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 that is happening with this administration. they want security. they want some kind of normalcy,

and i think this a gut election that will not be decided on issues. 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 there, or perhaps even more troublesome for the president? rep. yarmuth: i don't really see the same parallels. i don't think george bush was personally unpopular. his policies were. the war in afghanistan and iraq had turned bad. that was a very significant issue. the two tax cuts the bush administration had passed in 2001 and 2003 had caused a significant deficit, and there were more policy implications there and fewer personal ones. obviously 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. one of the other things is what i see 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 the common thread is that the people have decided that it is only through their energy that change is going to be effected. it is not going to be the calm letterwriting campaigns. 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 policy they want is to change the majority in congress or change the majorities in state legislatures or wherever it may be. i think the atmosphere is different than it was in 2006. ms. peterson: one of the more noticeable elements of conor lamb's 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 weaken 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 don't think that will be an issue that is at all pivotal in this campaign. in terms of her future, we will see what happens. i think she, as well as steny hoyer and jim clyburn understand that they have been around a long time and they have taken steps to kind of elevate some newer members in different

areas, and i think they see the light at the end of the tunnel for their careers, but what would be interesting to see -- and i have not heard to a people -- too many people talking about this is that they need 218 votes on the floor to elect a speaker, so if we were to return to the majority it could be a very , interesting election as people try to assemble 218 votes. now she and the caucus in the vote for minority leader, she got about 130 votes and never 60 votes cast for jim ryan. it would be interesting to see, particularly if you have a lot of these candidates pledging not to vote for her. that being said the most , important thing is what gets us to the majority, and i don't think campaigning against nancy pelosi is going to be effective. susan: about three minutes left.

mr. debonis: if we continue to see candidates standing up declaring they will not support nancy pelosi as this 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? before voters go to the polls? rep. yarmuth: my guess is she is constantly evaluating her future. just as she is consummate evaluating just about everything. she is a pretty savvy leader and savvy politician. nobody counts votes better than she does. i think she would make an assessment at the time. 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 not campaign against nancy 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 a bet 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 winning 35 to 40 seats. we need to win 24 -- well, now, 23 with conor lamb, although we have to win that one again so it is still 24.

yeah, 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. and there are democrats who want to be engaged -- everywhere i go, every event i go to, there's a record crowd. most importantly 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. i do not think the energy we are seeing on our side is going to dissipate between now and november, and i do not feel -- see much on the republican side it's going to give them more energy. so i'm very confident. mr. debonis: 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. do you think any of those other seats are in play as well?

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 lexington two-term mayor was very popular and that district. amy mcgrath, the air force pilot who made such a splash when she did her introductory video, and then reggie thomas, an african-american state senator, very, 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 that in any of the other districts they will end up being competitive, but we've got some really interesting candidates. one in hal rogers' district, which is largely appalachian. a guy who is a self-proclaimed rednecks who is of the savviest politicians i have met. he think there's a lot of satisfaction to dissatisfaction and exhaustion with hal rogers, who has been there a long time.

he thinks he can make a raisin that district. -- a race in the district. we have some pretty interesting candidate running against guthrie in the second district. that is a real long shot, but again, anything could happen this year. the dynamics are in many places are kind of uncharted. we will see. i'm hopeful. i love company. susan as we're taping this on : friday morning, we have just gotten word that longtime democratic congresswoman louise slaughter passed away due to complications from a fall. you have served with her from a long time. do you want to say anything? rep. yarmuth: i love louise. that saddens me greatly. 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 shared that. we shared bourbon. we shared love for the commonwealth and a love of congress.

my chief of staff was her chief of staff. that's a tragic loss for the congress. she was a great, great number and great american. susan: as the lead democrat on the house rules committee, a very familiar figure. , rissman, thank you for being our guest on "newsmakers" this week. on march 5, you follow the pieces of democrats don't have the energy after the last standoff to be really an opposition to this spending bill. did pennsylvania 18 change that at all? momentum mr. debonis: i don't think we're seeing that necessarily. i think that the fights at this point -- they are looking to have those fights in the balance -- balance of the spending bill on things like abortion and homeland security. there just is not seem to be the

bandwidth or the strategic desire to try and get into another showdown over daca or guns or another issue, so i think democrats feel like this omnibus spending bill accomplishes a lot of their priorities. they get increases in funding for domestic agencies, a lot of programs they want funded. i think for the bulk of the democratic caucus, that is good enough. that is a win. they are willing to move on and fight the battles, go to the midterms knowing that they have an advantage and press that advantage, so i do not think that the election results necessarily change anything with the way the bill is going to play out. susan with the large spending : increases in this budget plan that was proposed or passed a couple of weeks back, republicans, especially the is best fiscally conservative's once are pretty restless about it, so how much are democrat votes needed to get the bill

passed? ms. peterson: i think it's an unusual situation where everyone is pretty confident at the end of the day that this bill will pass, but it could be pretty close because i think you will have a lot of conservative republicans who say this is way too much spending and have democrats who are still unhappy that daca is not being resolved in it. i think it will come down to the whips getting a very exact count, and in the house, it could be very narrow. in the senate, i think it probably is not as tight. there could be some drama. last time around we saw senator rand paul create some dissent -- suspense with the timing, and they did miss that deadline, so we could see some drama there, but i think ultimately they will need both parties. it will draw from the center of both. susan both of you have noted in : your reporting this is the last major piece of legislation that must pass before the congressional election. how does that change the dynamic? mr. debonis: anyone who wants

to get something done before november is trying to get it attached to this bill. it's things like fixes to the tax bill. there's a number of things that are in play. kristi noem from south dakota is trying to get an internet sales tax provision added. people are trying to get the xm bank operating again. all of these little fights that have sort of been playing out in the background. they are engaged in trying to get the momentum to get it on this bill, and those are some of the things we will be watching in the next few days. ms. peterson: one caveat i would add is we always expect these to get sleepy on the hill before the midterms, but that has not happened since president trump took office. there's always the possibility of more cabinet shakeups.

we have two nominees that need to be confirmed in the senate just from this week. it seems there's less legislation that we know is coming, but there's always an amount of unpredictable he -- unpredictability. coming from this white house that could have repercussions on the hill. >> it has been an interesting year so far. as i said, only march. thank you so much for being here. the timetable now on the spending bill is what? it must pass by tuesday or they extend it for three weeks because of a break? mr. debonis: by friday. ms. peterson: they have a two-week recess. they need deadlines on capitol hill. they will be the first to tell you that. >> we will see what the week holds for us. thank you for being back. [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]

a" tonight on c-span's "q& professor tom cronin talks about his book "imagining a great republic." >> the reading of major american in termsis empowering of this country stands for something. the great writers, all these .eople are storytellers and they do some -- they try to do something special, a city that loves one another and is willing to work with one another, and understand that politics is indispensable. bring about progress or as many people are possible. at 8:00 eastern