[chanting "vote them out"] >> we will hear more about guns and the second amendment tomorrow when georgetown university host a forum that gets underway at 5:30 p.m. eastern. live coverage here on c-span. c-span, for history unfolds daily. 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. today we continue to review unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. you by yourought to

cable or satellite provider. susan: our guest on newsmakers this week is vermont's senior senator, patrick leahy, first elected in 1974. senator leahy is first in seniority in the united states senate, seniormost member of the judiciary and agriculture committee, and is vice chair of the senate appropriations committee, meaning he was in the middle of the negotiations of omnibus spending bill that the $1.3 trillion president signed into law friday. 2232 pages long, and it passed the senate by a vote of 65-32. thank you for being with us. sen. leahy: thank you. susan: we are speaking on friday, in the hour after the president's announcement, very critical of the democrats, saying the size of the bill is to directly to the democrats' opposition to spending more on the military and exacting concessions. what is your response? sen. leahy: that is baloney. i would give it the benefit of the doubt. the bill was -- i was involved

in all the debate and work in negotiations for the past several weeks. it was something where republicans and democrats came together on a bill that would pass with democratic and republican votes. we didn't increase spending for the military. we increased spending for domestic programs, and were able to do that because we removed the so-called sequestration. but it was a thing that was negotiated. it was harder with the white house negotiation because it seems like they changed their mind almost every 10 minutes. first, the president would not sign anything unless you put in $25 billion for $30 billion for last century's technology and some kind of wall on the border of mexico. of course he had given the solemn promise to the

electorate that he would build a wall because mexico would pay for it. someone suggested if that was the case, why don't we just open up a bank account as the money comes in from mexico and we build the wall. of course, we did not build the wall, and he is somewhat unhappy about that. susan: let me introduce two reporters who will be asking questions. andrew taylor from the associated press and anna edgerton from bloomberg news. who is going to go first. andy: senator the president took , to his favorite medium twitter to say democrats gave up a potentially good deal on these dreamer immigrants, on daca. how close did negotiations get on that? sen. leahy: they did not get close. i know you follow in the other reporters on capitol hill did. the president changed his position several times on dreamers.

the senate leadership thought they had an agreement. within hours the president came up with a different point. they got to where they did not know what to do. they obviously are not going to pay a $25 billion or $30 billion ransom for dreamers. i think what we've got to do is come back, have a real debate on it, and vote a bill up or down. put everybody on the line. i think if the house and senate actually have to vote on dreamer legislation, it will pass. they hoped to do it with president trump happy, but his position has changed so many times, almost on a whim. i know he has advisors in his administration who are totally anti-immigration. but i think it could be done. if people actually have votes on

it. andy: on these types of big bills, high profile issues threaten to of skier what is tothreaten to come skier -- obscure what is going on in the bill itself. you have been on the appropriations committee for decades. you've been scratching and clawing for little increases in various programs. in this go around, when president barack obama was controlling the white house, and now under a completely unified republican government, you've got an enormous increase. a virtual bounty. how did that happen? sen. leahy: i was not vice-chairman back then. that is not the answer. actually the answer is we had sequestration. and we also had a situation where the republican leader said his number one goal was for president obama to fail. to make the president fail the , country fails.

so you had to fight for every bit of it. -- i think enough people have spent a lot of time in my office in the capital pleading -- meeting with republicans and democrats, saying let's go back . actually do real bills, real appropriations bills. to's start writing them reflect the interests of the whole country, not just a small few. i think we will have -- in this past week, i've seen so many different senators in both parties come and talk to me and others say let's go back how it used to be. i've talked to senator mcconnell. i've talked with senator schumer. i've talked with key republicans

and democrats. if you are watching as the boat was going on last night and a debate was going on last night, he saw as many democrats on the republican side and republicans on the democrat side as i think i've seen in years. i think it is a sign that this country is actually going to have a voice in what is going on, it is going to be the congress. it cannot be done tweet by tweet from the white house. that worries me because the tweets are from the president who changes position almost in , one hours time. you can't tweet about his we are more. tariffs onweet about this one and not on this one, and see the stock market take one of the three biggest falls in all of history. i think there are enough

grown-ups in both parties for the senate and house to realize that we will have to try to keep the country stable. anna: it definitely seems like there is a realization in both chambers, both parties that the process needs to be different. there has been some talk about changing the budget process to make it run more smoothly. try to avoid doing five continuing resolutions in one fiscal year. what needs to change in the process and what changes do you need to make? sen. leahy: each one of the appropriations bills, bring it floor,e it on the technically that is what you're supposed to do. that is what we used to do. the results were so much better. also, you didn't have wild swings of the stock market where everybody didn't know what was going on. businesses knew what they could plan on and government agencies could. this white house seems to like

chaos and disruption. it may be fun for the evening news. it is not good for the country, and we would like to bring back stability. i use one example. for a number of years, on what we call the foreign relations committee, not to get too nerdy about this, but it handles all of our foreign aid in the state department. by the time i was chairman and mitch mcconnell was ranking member, by the time he was chairman, i was ranking member. we always finished on time, with an overwhelming bipartisan vote. i have talked with senator mcconnell. we should be doing that in all of this. i think senator shelby will be the new chairman of the senate appropriations committee. we want to do this. anna: why doesn't it work like that this year? is it trying to work with an unpredictable white house? susan: i think the unpredictable

white house did not help. what we thought were some good signs. the president met with democratic and republican leadership, for example on dreamers. we had a deal. within a day it was gone. not because congress changed their position, the president did. you can't tweet we are going to impose tariffs on steel, and then that turned out to be a catastrophic idea from the pushback of the republicans. we'll exclude these countries. these things are too complex. susan: the president had a prescription today for addressing the budget problems. he called for an end to the legislative filibuster and wants a line-item veto, which the supreme court said in was 1998 unconstitutional. sen. leahy: i don't think he

worries about whether things are unconstitutional are not. he has also called for censorship of the press, being able to sue the press if they disagree with him. we've gone through a lot of things. about arresting people and doing due process later on. that's not the way government works. that's why we have checks and balances. what he is saying is we will do everything right in the white house, and the congress is irrelevant. this country is built on having a checks and balances between the ranch is a government. that is necessary. i would hate to think if we were doing our budget by tweet. susan: any appetite for ending the filibuster? sen. leahy: the filibuster is pretty well gone on many things. this could have been filibustered last night. it wasn't. it was delayed by a few hours, did the we basically

filibuster by a couple of votes and it was gone. it ise filibuster threatened more than used. there are times when it seems like it is being used. it is not given everybody knows the end result. it has been years since we've seen a real filibuster where people talk on the floor. i've been there long enough to actually see those, but they are extremely rare. what i would much rather see is us come back and say a set of only bills that can be done by a voice vote with no amendments, let's have real legislation. come in earlier monday, stay friday if need be. i think there are a lot of people including younger, newer , members, as well as those that have been there a long time, we would like to see it come back

that way. andy: there will be probably hundreds of thousands of young people coming to washington this weekend to advocate for gun control and measures to address school shootings. since they are young to have probably not been to the history in which you past an assault ban in the 1990's. there was a backlash politically that attributed to best contributed to democrats losing -- that contributed to democrats losing congress. much of the time, it seems like congress is simply cowed by the gun lobby and national rifle association, including some politicians from your own state, at one time anyway. what can these young people expect out of congress? some of them -- addressed the background check system, but you have expanded background checks and that doesn't seem likely.

what can they expect? sen. leahy: i think your history, your indictment is correct. and it is frustrating. i come from the state of the union that is the least gun control of any state in the country. with one exception, we limit the rounds of ammunition you can put in your semi automatic during deer season. i say we ought to limit the rounds and protect children. if we can protective deer, we have far more of a reason to protect children. when i was chairman of judiciary , a number of significant gun-control measures on semi background checks that does not allow someone to come in and make straw purchases or do you it -- or do it without background checks. real background checks.

republican leadership in the house refused to take it up. i get criticized by the gun lobby for that? of course. i remember they say they were opposed to universal background checks. i would think that most americans would assume that, and we have to go back and try these again. i think we ought to listen to these young people because there -- people, but there are a lot of other aspects too. , we have got to stop bullying in schools here at it is a major, major factor in this country. we've got to make sure there's a -- there is ability for somebody who, if they have a concern, come forward and talk about it and have the resources to follow up on it. i will tell you one thing. i would be totally opposed to will be solved by

arming teachers. teachers have enough work to do today to teach children. i want teachers to concentrate on teaching children. if you have to have armed professionals in a school, then make that decision. andy: do think the pendulum is swinging back against the gun lobby? sen. leahy: i hope so. i hope so. in fact i worry very much about any lobby that is basically a single issue lobby. on either the right or left. i think that has created a problem to the fact that since citizens united the fact that , one single issue group on the right or left can have too much of a control. a lot of it has been on the right with the koch brothers. they are trying to take over state legislatures, governors offices, and the house and

and in washington. let's go back to having actual people having a voice. and i think you see these young people are people in that sense. they don't care about the lobbies. they care about being safe and going to school. i think of my own grandchildren, when they go to school, i want them safe. i think every parent wants them safe. can you imagine being a parent, and you hear there's been a shooting at a school and you go there and find your child is the who you will never speak to again? nobody should have to face that. anna: we spoke a lot about domestic issues and unpredictability in the white house. i want to get your thoughts on the changes to the president's

national security team, both with mike pompeo being replaced by john bolton. what do you think of the president's foreign-policy going with this new team he has in place? sen. leahy: foreign policy. do want to know where it's going at 9:30 or 9:35? that's what is bothering me. -- bothering our allies. they expect at least some kind of continuity. they may disagree with it, but they want some kind of continuity so they can make their own plans. i think that is going to be a problem. john bolton is not the right person to be in there. remember when he was nominated to be our ambassador to the united nations? he was never confirmed because too many republicans, as well as democrats were opposed to him. this is not a person who takes a simplistic view of foreign policy. whether it is north korea, iraq. -- iran.

we can't simply go to war. we saw how badly that turned out in iraq. anna: do you think it would be difficult for him to get confirmed? sen. leahy: he doesn't have to be confirmed. the president is a confirmation of one. pompeo will face a lot of questions before confirmation. considering some of his past speeches that have been looked at. the state department faces real problems. the firing of rex tillerson was probably the most clumsily handling of a secretary of state of seen in 40 years and there are going to have to be changes there at the state department, whether he is a person to do the changes or not, i will sit down and talk with him, but i'm concerned about some of his past rather simplistic views of our

foreign-policy. and i can't emphasize how important this is. we are the most powerful nation on earth. we are still the wealthiest nation on earth. we can be a moral leader, but not if we are changing our position every few days. the fact that we have seen pushback from some of our nato allies, publicly pushback is a concern. i will go to nato headquarters next week. i am looking forward to talking to some of these people. i've gotten to know them over the years, and at least in private conversations, i think we will be very open and candid. andy: you were elected in a wave collection. -- election. waveave witnessed several

elections both good and bad for , the democratic party. do you see a wave this year? in 1974, the only democrat ever elected in the state of vermont, and the youngest, i was 34. i was given the nomination nobody else wanted. i was opposed to the war in vietnam. every single member of congress from vermont had always voted in support of the war in vietnam. the majority opinion in vermont was in favor of the war. a lot of newspapers favored it. i said i would vote against it. people were targeted for defeat. 10 were defeated, myself and one other made it through. that was a wave election. i had the second closest election in the country. i assumed it was because of my philosophy, so i called the senator who had the closest

election and said barry goldwater, is it our philosophy? and we became very good friends after that. susan: another question? andy: sen. leahy: i don't know. the last few elections, i have been able to pick them very well. this one, i can't get the feel. i think it was a strong sign in what happened in alabama. with senator jones with the gubernatorial race in virginia. -- with senator jones. with the gubernatorial race in virginia. but i don't know the answer. i hope it is, because i like to see our party in the majority. anna: one of the long-term issues facing the country is the deficit. not just discretionary spending by five mandatory programs. i was wondering if you could see a political coalition that would be the right kind of

combination to address this. whether it is democrats in the senate and republicans in the house or vice versa. what do policymakers need to make those changes to make mandatory programs sustainable? sen. leahy: we need something like what we saw in the past within sai conservative senator robert dole and liberal senator pat moynihan coming together to save social security. it is just one example that shows it can be done. we just put together an enormous , and enormous tax cut bill that favors only small percentages of public. it hurts others. that's not a good way to start. but is it necessary? yes. i hope it can be done. again, you are going to have to tell those special interests on

the right and left, tell us what you think or we will make the decision. can't be done? i've seen it done in the past. i see a lot less of it today. anna: is that kind of ideological compromise possible? sen. leahy: i'm trying to answer and probably i don't know the answer. it is less possible than it has been in the past, and that is what happens with similar issues of special interests. i hope it can be done. susan: final question for you, different topic. you begun to circulate among senators to raise the idea of a legislative booze for the independent counsel robert , mueller. are you getting positive response? do you think a sizable majority oring be interested in sh

up their position. sen. leahy: i think they will. lindsey graham said it would be a disaster to fire bob mueller. i remind everybody nearly precedent we've had for was watergate with richard nixon which did not turn out well. , this would be a very serious mistake, because the russians are trying to interfere with the united states. the russians are trying to influence us, as they are a lot of other countries. and the mueller investigation , may be the one thing where you had people stand up and say yes, that is happening. let's do something about it. i -- many of us are speaking out on what a bad mistake they would be to fire. i would hope the president is listening. legislation would be difficult

because, of course, the president could veto the legislation and you need two thirds majority. i hope that wouldn't be necessary, but if it looks like it is possible, they might do it. we ought to stay in session, if need be around the clock and pass that legislation. susan: senator leahy, thank you for being our guest. sen. leahy: thank you. susan: newsmakers is back with anna edgerton of bloomberg, andy taylor of associated press. senatorjust talked with patrick leahy, the lead democrat on the appropriations committee. a one point the trillion dollar -- a $1.3 trillion omnibus bill and no one seems happy with the process, though people seem to be happy with the additional projects. is it clear if the winner and loser's from a money standpoint? andy: he said he's not happy

with the process, but the process gives him as the top democrat on the committee enormous power. as for winners and losers, i think, as the senator alluded to, democrats really have the republicans in a difficult spot because the republicans were really gunning for this money for the pentagon. as the president said in his press conference today, he wanted that she felt the need to keep the country secure and that the principal reason why he signed it. if the democrats knew that, they were able to insist on things that they never could get under president obama. they got enormous sums for things like community endowment, -- community development block thatnts, obscure programs the c-span audience has not heard of necessarily but are , really important to the people who make policy around here. the democrats did well on their domestic priorities, and denied

for the most part trump a victory on the wall. that was one of the reasons trump came out on twitter and briefly threatened to veto it today. susan: the government shutdown over daca, deferred action for childhood immigrants. i'm wondering, they were no nowhere in the final legislation. anna: this was a very long, drawnout process. the fiscal year started october 1, and now we are in march and they finally passed this big appropriations process. there were five continuing resolutions. the senator said that is not how the process is supposed to work, and he would like to go back to writing appropriations bills and passing them one by one. there were a lot of side issues that complicated that process. last year it was the tax bill. the republicans said they wanted

to start negotiating and earlier , this year, it was daca and democrats didn't want to sign an appropriations bill because it was the only leverage they had that is what gave them some license to go ahead and go through the probations process for some members. >> they are calling for reform. where are you six months into this fiscal year, they should be starting on the process of the next step of the appropriations bill. with -- anyto be reforms? you'll see a lot of success in getting it back to the way the senate has described. one of the reasons is there is a division in the republican party

and they can't get all of their members to sign on to the overall spending numbers. when they go ahead and draws up these bills, they add in all these writers and policy provisions, when they come out out committee there isn't a coalition for that type of material. -- four monthse and they get picked up in negotiating the type of negotiation we have seen. as for -- there is also a supercommittee that works on the budget process. i don't expect that to go anywhere. thousands of the own people in washington and cities all over the united states. they are here to express support

for safer schools. to better legislation and also to other proposals that have been went forward. the appetite on capitol hill for this type of thing? the most one of important domestic challenges we had. it is hard for publicans to get behind any control forgot legislation. it was providing support for the background check process that got pushed back. even though the majority of americans may want more gun necessarily's not the way it is playing out in congress. you will see a difficult , weition coming together could see it being a central issue. >> were you surprised about the

elections? leaning on the democrats, yes, i was surprised. -- thankyou for role you to both of you for being back on newsmakers. >> thank you. >> c-span's washington journal live everyday with news and policy issues that impact you. senateup monday morning staffer ira shapiro this this is his book "broken can the senate save itself in the country". net -- recent changes to donald trump's security team. and federal money for school choice. watch c-span's washington onrnal live at 7:00 eastern

monday morning. join the discussion. >> republican senator jeff flake traveled to new hampshire, the state that holds the he is not seeking reelection said he has no plans to run for higher office in 2020 but he has not ruled anything out. this is just over an hour.