book, i do not think this judgment will change. it was one of the biggest surety to blunders in american history. >> james mattis just man -- mann. stretche in the home for the midterm elections. tim phillips is our guest for this week. he has been involved in republican party politics for nearly 30 years. since 2006 he has been resident of americans for prosperity, and is a senior advisory to a super pac, americans for prosperity action. mr. phillips, thanks for being our guest. asking questions, lisa is an associated press correspondent, and we have bill, a bloomberg

finance reporter. we are all interested in numbers looking at election date. let's start with the house. tim: republicans odds have improved. the data has been consistent. democrats, historically speaking, it would be favored to win the house. they only need 23 seats. obama lost 63 seats in 2010. bush lost lost 30 seats, clinton lost 54 seats, the odds are against them but they have improved markedly in the last three weeks. no question. >> what caused the improvement? tim: it began during the kavanaugh hearings. it could've been done better frankly on both sides. but it began there. the base for republicans became more energized without question. and a lot of swing voters, especially in red-leaning

states, that's where a lot of senate action is heaviest this year, and on the house side there are a couple of republican seats in red-leaning states. those swing voters in red-leaning state moved from democrats toward republicans. >> what is your outlook for the senate? tim: for republicans, the odds are with them gaining if you seats. this is the good map for republicans since the fdr years of the 1930's. so they are blessed with a good map and are making good use of it at this point. it looks like they will gain a couple of seats. lisa: the organization has talked about something like $300 million this cycle on your politics and policies, supporting the issues and candidates you care about. have you spent that? are you able to spend that? and who is the organization?

we hear so much about dark money in our election system. americans for prosperity has long been aligned with the koch brothers and the koch companies. who is behind your organization? tim: we have donors from all 50 states, giving it widely different levels. some of them are major donors, significant figures. others are four dollars or five dollars online or in some cases direct mail. so it's a broad number of americans exercising their first amendment rights to be involved in the policy process. and our view is that more free speech in the political arena is a good thing. sometimes incumbents want to more tightly control who does what in their districts or their states, but we think it's a good thing. we've always felt that, whether it was money coming from folks who are aligned with us on the

issues or otherwise. we think it's a good policy thing. lisa: what are the beliefs and goals behind your organization? republican, libertarian, who are you? tim: we want to remove barriers that keep so many americans living their version of the american dream. in the government and politics arena, where i focus my time, that often is government in the form of higher taxes or too much regulation and red tape, or in some cases the criminal justice system that puts too many people who shouldn't be behind bars behind bars for too long, and while they are there, doesn't help them succeed once they are out of prison. so it's removing those barriers. i know that often we held republicans accountable in a way they would actually not think of us as a republican group, because we are not. we are not an appendage of any political party. lisa: $300 million is what you

are spending this cycle? tim: it's important to note that this is over two years and it is at the state and federal level. in wisconsin we are very active in support of scott walker, running for reelection for governor. so it's not all focused on federal elections. lisa: and how much are you spending on congressional battles? tim: it's a lot. i don't have a specific number, but it's a significant amount. but that also includes issued efforts. during tax reform in 2017, our network spent millions of dollars, pushing, urging activism to make sure members heard from folks back home on that issue. >> at the federal level, you became head of the super pac earlier this year and one thing we noticed in the filing last night is that koch industries

took $2 million from the corporate treasury into the super pac. at the federal level, in terms of the disclosure of these donors, why you set -- why did you set up the super pac and why did you go to the kind of vehicle? tim: it shows the commitment we have to the policy and political arena. we wanted every available avenue to us to be able to deliver messages in the closing days of these campaigns. it's a very competitive environment. the super pac helps us do that. it's another tool, another means to an end, and for us the end is good policies and the elections are part of that, but it helped us give a full, provide a full array of capabilities we need. >> on the federal spending, i think there has been $10 million disclosed so far. there is a lot of ways an organization like afp, a welfare

organization, or super pac, that don't necessarily trigger fec disclosure. pennsylvania in 2016, you ran bus caravans, and you are not saying vote for her or vote against her, and doesn't run into the independent expenditure type of disclosure. are you doing the same efforts in 2018? tim: get out the vote is important. i was in richmond virginia, the seventh congressional district, a few days ago. it was get out the vote efforts there. it's a broad array of activities. the americans for prosperity action committee, the super pac, that lets us be a little more direct, gives more leeway to deliver a message, but the c4, americans for prosperity, it

does let us do a lot of activities, especially get out the vote in the closing days of the election. >> there has been in a norm us -- enourmous shift away from the party structure to outside groups like yours, and some on the other side of the aisle. what does this mean for funding campaigns and having outside financial contributions to campaigns? is this a change in the way we elect candidates, and the way candidates are supported on the campaign trail? tim: we hope it leads to candidates being more independent, so they are not locked in to a party position or a tribal position, so to speak, but where they can genuinely do what is best to help people. so we want members of congress, and at the state level legislature as well, we want them to know that if they do the

right thing, they take bold risk, we mentioned criminal justice or tax reform or federal spending or copperheads of immigration reform, which is an important issue to our network, if they do that, they're outside groups, -- there are outside groups irrespective of party that will stand with them, have their back. that's our goal, to let elected leaders know that you don't have to be beholden to a party or a specific special interest group if you do the right thing on policies. there are groups out there that will help, who will help deliver that message and will thank you and potentially at election time, will support you very directly. >> less talk about some key congressional races. your organization decided not to endorse in some key senate races. kevin cramer is in a tight race as the republican challenger to incumbent senator heidi heitkamp

of north dakota, you are not backing him. other senate candidates could very well be candidates who could help republicans increase their majority. why is a group that would typically support these candidates, why are you not supporting them? tim: we wanted to raise the bar. a lot of times, too many republicans talk a good game at election time in their districts or their states, but when it really comes time to end cronyism, corporate cronyism, to genuinely rein in spending, they don't follow through. so we publicly said back in the spring, we are going to raise the bar, we are going to make sure that before our network comes in in a significant way or really any way at all, we want policy champions, vaux to do the right things on the issues that can move our country forward,

that actually lead, and that also do it in a way that brings people together. so with that criteria, there were some candidates that did not make the cut, and kramer was one of the -- and cramer was one of them. we looked at indiana also in decided not to spend there. >> so you're not supporting mike braun, running against joe donnelly, the democratic incumbent. tim: we are happy to support marsha blackburn in tennessee. we have held claire mccaskill accountable in missouri. there are champions running that republicans have, so we are involved in a lot of races, but we absolutely made a decision to be clear we've never been an appendage of any party, that we

wanted to send a stronger message this year. we thought it was important to do that. the omnibus, that's not the only reason but that was a big one, and inflection point for us, that so many republicans who talk about being fiscally responsible instead blew through spending caps, at around $600 billion more than they promised to spend. and now we have a situation this year where tax cuts have brought in additional revenue to the government, because when you lower tax rates you increase economic after giving -- economic activity and growth, and we are seeing that, but the deficit is too much. >> on the big annual spending bill that funds the government, the president said he might veto and then went ahead and signed because of some of the issues you raised. you mentioned tax cuts, and one thing you didn't say as we opened his that it was something that was popular on the campaign trail. republicans were hoping this

would be the cornerstone of their midterm argument, that this would lead to voter enthusiasm in helping to reelect republicans and elect more republicans to congress. but we have seen that hasn't happened. why was that not something that resonated so much? tim: i actually think it has. when you look at the data, and talking to voters, i was in tennessee, wisconsin, they are pleased, voters, that the economy is doing better. and the tax-cut is a crucial reason for that. and so many republicans across the country are saying, we have an economy that is humming, that's a good thing, and the next thing we say is, we cut taxes to make that possible. and a lot of our messaging and our network is on the benefits of that tax cut. that remains in our scripts today on the phones, where we thank members for supporting

or hold members accountable for opposing. so it's a signature element for us, and for a lot of republicans it's important to note voters are looking at the economy doing better, and it's one reason, that tax cut, that republican numbers have improved in the past few weeks. and it is one reason president trump's approval numbers have gone up as well. when you look issue by issue, the public thinks he is doing a good job, the economy is an area where the public is positive, five points to nine points, and one reason is the tax cuts. >> 10 minutes to go. a lot of members of the new york and california delegations voted against the tax bill, but a couple voted for it, tom mcarthur in new jersey and claudia tenney in new york. so far you guys have not spent anything supporting those candidates. is there a reason you are shying

away, that they took a tough vote for states where one of the big issues is the state and local tax deductions, which was a campaign theme in both those races? is there some reason you are not backing those candidates? tim: tax cuts and the tax reform was one key measurement we have used to decide who to be involved with, but it wasn't the only one. we look at government spending, government cronyism, raining it in -- reigning it in, things like the import-export bank, corporate welfare. so we look at a broad array of issues and support candidates or thank candidates who agree with us on a broad number of them. so it is not just one issue, it's a broad bundle, but we thanked every republican, the republicans who voted for the tax cuts and reform -- not only the republicans who voted for

the tax-cut and reform, we thanked every republican by name. we made it clear at town hall meetings across the country, including new jersey, that it is a benefit for every state, and for most americans, the vast majority of americans, the tax cuts, they are paying less for sure. so we have thanked every republican member who voted for it, and a most all of them did, by name. on your website you have a tab for california, are you building a network in california? you said you weren't active there. tim: we have activity there, but it is not a full-scale operation like a place in florida, where we have 14 field offices and large field staffs permanently on the ground. with our network, we don't pop

up for one election or when issue, we are there permanently. so it's not like states where there is a significant presence year round. wisconsin, we have the field offices across that state. but we do have activity there, and when you have an economy like, i think it is just the seventh biggest, just past the seventh biggest, just past the u.k., california did, you can't write it off. you need to continue looking at it and see over time if you can make a difference. >> i want to talk about data gathering and analytics. the dnc would was considered to have a lead in gathering and processing, it's been reported your organization has spent millions on technology this cycle. i'm wondering what you think about the state of the republican party overall competitively, on its data gathering, use an analysis in the campaign, and how well teed

up are republicans for 2020? tim: i can only speak for i 360, our data analytics operation. i think it's one of the best out there. it tells you which households to go to, and very seldom do i get a house where someone has moved, or it's not the person they are supposed to be. we have invested heavily for almost a decade, and we think the data gap which existed in 2012, no question it was there, we do think it has been dramatically closed. a lot of candidates and organizations use our network's data, i360. at this point to think both sides, or on the sides out there, have good data. it's whether you have a good infrastructure and a credible

message and delivery. that's where grassroots volunteers and field staffs who have been in a community for a long time and understand the focus they are trying to reach, and are genuinely part in the community, that is the premium now. i think the data for the most part is balanced. it's now a question of who has the most credible messengers to deliver your message. >> could you share with the gop party apparatus, if you wanted to, is that allowable? tim: i360 is a company with our network that works with a wide array of campaigns, the party as well, different organizations, c4's or c threes. >> what is your prediction?

do you think republicans keep control of the house, or do you think it slips to democrats? tim: i don't think it is going to be a wave election. five of the last six federal elections have been change elections. if you go back to 2006 and work forward, only 2012 was a status quo election. the other ones have been strong change elections, where a chamber changed hands, and in 2016 with a presidency changed hands between parties. it's a bigger challenge for republicans in the house. the odds are with the democrats, but that is a broader historical statement aced on that and based on five of the last six elections being change elections, and the party in power struggling in the midterms, but the senate, due to a good map and good candidates like marsha blackburn or josh hawley, the republicans did a good job recruiting candidates.

it's one of the best groups of candidates i've seen in the three decades i've been in this arena. i think they're going to get a couple of seats. >> were defunc -- where do you think there is going to be a surprise in the senate? tim: montana is closer than people think, and there has been discussion that the polls are tightening. but i think it is a lot closer. and someone who has made movement has been josh hawley -- josh hawley in missouri. in october, the past few weeks it has changed there. i think the biggest gap closure is there and i think she is in big trouble in missouri, but montana is the one i would urge folks to watch.

marsha blackburn has built more of a lead, it has been a tough race there, but she is one of the best candidates i think in either party in a long time. i think she's going to win that senate seat and i think she's going to be a genuine champion in the u.s. senate. >> you been involved in governor scott walker's race in wisconsin. are there other gubernatorial races you are focusing on? tim: the freedom partners action fund, that's from our broader network, it is active for ron desantis, he was great in the house on so many issues. same thing with the freedom partners action fund in nevada with adam lax -- adam laxalt. colorado as well. when you think about republican numbers on the gubernatorial front, it's the highest watermark since the coolidge

years of the 1920's. so you would think there would be a correction and they would lose a few seats, because you are not going to sustain a high water mark that has not been seen in seven decades or so. so you would think there would be some gap closure by democrats there, but laxalt, some folks thought that as a third-party candidate he might struggle. but some of the data i've seen shows he is within the margin of error in that state. >> governor ducey in arizona has been one of the best governors in the country from policy achievements he has brought about. >> i want to close on a more general note, friday midday when we are taping this, it has been an unsettling week with all of

these pipe bomb packages delivered. today, two more, senator cory booker and james clapper, and we just got word that there has been an arrest in florida of one man. i'm using that to ask you about the general state of political discourse in this country, how you feel about it, having watched this for as many years as you have. tim: it is deteriorating, without question. and there is blame enough to go around to anybody, including our network. we have looked at every single television ad we have done in recent years, every digital ad, every script, and we are working to have a different tone and manner. you can disagree on important issues in a civil way, and we think that is important. so we are trying to hold ourselves to a higher standard. but it is a bad state at this point, and one thing we are doing when we look at who to support, i mentioned it earlier, we look at the tone they take.

we want people who genuinely who try to bring the country together, and that's one criteria. it's how they vote on the issues, it's if they are leading, genuinely leading on key issues, it also that they really try to bring americans together, and not use the rhetoric, tone and manner we are seeing too much on all sides right now. >> is it possible the leader of the republican party, that he's so combative all the time? tim: the president goes too far, at the same time, all sides go too far. some of the rhetoric during the kavanaugh hearings, it was extreme. it certainly did not have a place in the supreme court setting or any political government setting so there's blame to go around for everyone.

but we have called out the president, let's have a different tone. but we have also called out chuck schumer, folks across the board, and we have tried to hold ourselves to a higher standard as well. i think that is part of it, saying that if you are in this arena whether you are an individual member of congress or the president or the administration or an outside group with a large megaphone, start at home first. make sure the weight you carry yourself and your organization sets the right standard. our network is trying to do that. >> thanks for being our guest this week. c-span's newsmakers is back after our conversation with tim phillips, president of americans for prosperity and senior advisor of their new pack, americans for prosperity action. lisa, bill. bill, you spent a lot of time pouring over numbers and fec reports. explain to people what the influence of an organization like the americans for prosperity action super pac, and

their americans for prosperity, which has a different role in the elections, can you explain how it works? >> the key thing to remember is that when you are looking at individual races, particularly the house, and outside group like americans for prosperity action can have a huge impact. and they are very selective about candidates they are supporting. you heard they have a series of metrics they used to grade candidates and decide whether to spend money, so that's a real impact they can have. they come to a district, spend money on advertising and push a particular thing, and you can move the numbers when you are an outside group like that. there are a ton of outside groups spending money. there are $113 million still in the table for four major super pac's that are closely tied to the two political parties that are also spending in these races and sometimes it can end up just being noise, but the strength of

americans for prosperity action is that they come in with a targeted campaign, promoting their issues, and they hope they can move the needle. with americans for prosperity, the nonprofit organization, they have on the ground people around the country that do canvassing, knocking on doors, voter contacts, voter rallies, holding informational sessions, and that is hard to replicate when you are dumping big money on tv. i think that's one of the things people forget about americans for prosperity, is that they have members all over the country and are active, and they do those kinds of voter outreach, voter contacts that can help turn in election. >> in an age of viral videos and social media and text messaging to voters, it sounds like getting out and knocking on doors still matters. >> it certainly does, and this

organization does have a grassroots presence, if you would call it that, or at least a stable of volunteers who go knock on doors in a targeted way. many reporters, we've been out with groups like this. you see other groups on the other side doing it as well, and it shows you the power these groups have in influencing voters, and in this way they have in the candidates who come to office. what was interesting is that this cycle, mr. phillips, tim's group, is not endorsing some of the very republicans that helped put in some of the policies like the republican tax cut bill that they have championed. and it just shows you the pressure these lawmakers are under when they do come to office, from supportive groups like this and other groups on

the other side, to really hold to the principles and the values that the groups promote. and if you stray too far, you will not have backing in the future. so i think that is often unseen to voters. you get a knock at the door and you don't always know who these groups are, and what impact they have in electing these candidates and holding these candidates accountable if they come to congress. >> president trump has been working hard to nationalize these elections, he has a full schedule up till election day of rallies. is this going to be a referendum on president trump, or individual decisions on individual candidates? >> it's a tough thing to get into the heads of all the voters, but president trump has loomed incredibly large over the political scene since his

announcement he was running for president. i can't imagine his performance in office won't be a factor in the minds of many voters. >> the election in the midterm is always a referendum on the elect -- a referendum on the president, how it is doing -- how he is doing his first two years in office, it also new candidates, and new faces in the districts and getting folks in those districts someone new to look at, someone new to vote for, so maybe it is interest in a new candidate but also, i check on the president on both sides. >> thanks for being with us. we will all be watching the countdown until election day. ♪ onmore campaign 2018 debates

monday as bernie sanders faces his republican opponent. watch life beginning at noon on c-span. in the house raise for kentucky's sixth district, andy barr debates amy. live from lexington on monday at 8:00 on c-span. you can watch both debates on our website or use the radio app. c said, your primary source for campaign 2018. ♪ next week on washington journal, battleground states. the most competitive races of the midterm elections, minister to and more, california, and sylvania, -- pennsylvania. watch for: at 7:00 eastern on c-span. the c-span bus is traveling

across the country on our 50 capitals tour. during our stop in boston, we asked which party should control congress and why? >> i would like the house to remain republican because i like the way things are going. i like the way the economy is going. to switch to democrat it would create gridlock and not the lots would get done. the way things are going is one of the best runs in recent history and i would like it to stay that way. >> i would like to house to flip, i want to see a democratic majority, i do not like the way washington is going with the republican house. it should be changed and it would be for the better. >> i want to house to remain in republican hands because i am tired of gridlock and things not getting done. if it flips it will be another session of no change. >> the issues most important

relative to fall is that there be balance and the house. forcel offset a bit and the current administration to govern from the center which is important. when we govern from the center, i teach my students this as a history teacher. it teaches us to have empathy for the other side and to be able to recognize other people and issues that are important to them. voices from the states, part of c-span 50 capital store. ceo of the educational fund held a press conference to talk about the influence of hispanic voters. this hour-long event took place at the national press club in washington, d.c.. you're watching campaign 2018 coverage on c-span.