idea. let viewers decide all on their own what was important to them. c-span open the doors to washington policymaking for all to see. bringing you unfiltered congress from congress and beyond. in the age of power to the people this was true people power. in the 40 year since, the landscape has clearly changed. there is no monolithic media, broadcasting has given way to narrowcasting, youtube stars are thing but c-span's big idea today is more relevant today. no government money so sports support c-span, public as a public service -- funded as a public service on television, online, c-span is your unfiltered view of government. so you can make up your own mind. >> our guest on "newsmakers" this week is representative mchenry. of north carolina. he returns after a long hiatus. he is a republican representing the 10th district from the

charlotte suburbs to asheville north carolina. he's the seniormost republican on the finance committee. rep. mchenry: thank you for having me. our reporters will be asking the questions, from the wall street journal and a federal reserve reporter for the new york times. glad to have you here. >> we are curious to hear about your take on the recent fed nominations. jobs butd for these not formally nominated. i'm also curious to hear you talk about what they would like to see out of future nominees. rep. mchenry: the senate is in the nominee business, and we in the house are not. i do not spend much of my time obsessing about the nominating process. i watch it like most people in washington.

pretty closely. more closely within my jurisdiction. those two offerings from the white house, they represent a different view out of the white house which is the polar opposite of the obama administration view. president obama put labor leaders, this was an attempt to balance that out in a different direction. as my senate colleagues look at the details of individual nominees backgrounds, i do think it is interesting, the makeup of the fed board of governors and it is important to have folks willing to stay in long-term and look deeply at these issues. the fed, while they have great data, they are still in the people business. and the people on the board of governors make balance sheet decisions, and it is more about intellect and feel than data on

any given day. that is a question of policy how to construct and limit the decision-making. i look at it as another part of the process of an interesting senate and nominating process, different than it has been in my previous years of service. >> to follow up on that, when you are talking to your colleagues at the senate, do you think they should be prioritizing nominees who do not risk politicizing the fed? that was of major criticism of these nominees, they have close ties to the white house, the fed is in a political body coming so that raised eyebrows. rep. mchenry: i do not spend much time thinking about it. i have enough on my plate before analyzing the nominees.

i think the president should get his nominees considered by the senate. i think the senate should be a better functioning body and how they process nominations up or down, whatever the outcome. the broader question for the federal reserve is what the last president and every previous president has gotten their nominees on the board of governors, that has had a long-term effect. the important thing is the independence of the fed, to set interest rate policy and ensure the value of our money. we are the reserve currency for the world, we need to maintain that. the credibility of the fed goes right at that. i look at monetary policy and our balance sheets, i know they are in independent agency, independent of politics on capitol hill or the white house, but i recognize regulatory authorities, and that is where i spend my time looking at the

fed. those regulations can have as much of an impact interest rate setting as from the federal reserve, and those areas, the hill has necessary and proper oversight in a forceful and meaningful way. wherein, you can see interest rates and balance sheet questions we have given to them to be independent of the hill. >> given that independence, does it mean the president or any high ranking official should be -- should not be giving explicit public guidance to the fed chairman and potentially threatening their job prospect? rep. mchenry: the president tweets what he thinks and feels, that is different than previous presidents. some people like it, some people do not. the president has made his decision. what he is expressing is what every president has either privately expressed or quite in the dark of night expressed in

their diary, as we found out over the last hundred years. what he is expressing is the same as what fdr was expressing and every president since then effectively. their interest rate setting, their analysis of the economy and everything else. this president is going to publicly express his frustrations, and that is his communication style. what i know, and we agree upon in a bipartisan way, not perfect, but there is an understanding that we have legislated control of our monetary policy out of the hands of daily politics into longer-range thinking. we have had push and pull oversight, which is good. this oversight also gives nuance and framework for what the fed does in terms of regulatory policy. that is fine.

we are currently in the midst of loud politics, and both the left and right, they see policy over the last 10 years as a frustrating thing, massive intervention in our economy. you are seeing more public expression from everyone on fed policy. i do not think that will calm down with a balance sheet as large as the fed has for quite some time. >> to ask about a different oversight, the president is suing deutsche bank and capital one from complying with democrats, do you think that lawsuit will be successful, and the you have concerns about what president that was set? -- any precedent that would set? rep. mchenry: this is a risky proposition.

it is a risky proposition because as congress, the first branch of government, we are a coequal branch of government, there is proper congressional oversight of the executive branch. and executive branch agencies. proper oversight to get documentation to make law. the push and pull about this issue, the legal issue at stake is deeply problematic. if you go to the courts and they rule against congress, that can have a negative effect for our branch of government. i am concerned about it. i have another concern which is the president as a person, his family, and his businesses could curtail our coequal status in the courts. the request for this documentation is not about proper legislation, it is about getting something the president was not legally required to provide.

you comply with the financial disclosure regimes such as it is for presidential candidates. and he did not comply with the tradition of letting his tax returns be made public. that is a tradition, a modern tradition, not a requirement of law. he complied with the law, but there is the of session with his with hissession business dealings, and so a lot of these requests go to the third point which is the mueller report. that mueller team spent an extraordinary amount of time, they came to conclusion. the better understanding than getting documents from these institutions about things that have been queried by a special counsel that has spent $30

million to get to the bottom of the question of the 2016 election and the president's business dealings and how they could interact. this is a deeply problematic approach, and that is why i have been skeptical of this request. >> regulations? >> i would love to ask about regulations. you have obviously been on the front lines of urging the regulatory agencies to implement dodd frank relief permissions, -- dodd frank reg relief regulations why do you think it , needs to proceed more quickly. do you think there is any risk that implementing these things quickly could risk fostering financial instability within the system?

rep. mchenry: the heart of the question is what we passed in the last congress, which was 10 years after dodd frank was signed into law, we passed senate bill 2155 which is now law that rebalance dodd frank, took the most egregious aspects of dodd frank and sanded them down. the threshold for being considered a significant financial institution and therefore higher regulations, that was raised, and there is a bipartisan agreement. a number of things that can form with the sanding off of the rough edges of dodd frank, that bill got two thirds vote in the senate, and was signed into law. it is a bipartisan concept and process, and now the regulators need to move quickly to provide relief for community financial institutions, which is the focus of this change.

big banks are under the same regulatory challenges as under dodd frank. these were agreements we could reach for the smaller institutions. we have a partisan understanding because we see the stats. we have lost a third of community banks in this country over the last 10 years. a third of them. that is a significant thing. it is devastating for local communities. we see a community bank or institution merging or going out of business. we are trying to give that relief for the smaller institutions to get back to the business they should be in, community lending. if they get back into that, they can survive the changing marketplace. that was the focus. in the construct of our regulatory system, moderate in its effects overall, but

significant to the smaller institutions. it will be helpful to our economy in the long run and not a component of the next financial crisis, if there were to be one. read is that it is taking too long? what do you think is the holdup? rep. mchenry: the whole regulatory process is slow. i am encouraging the regulators to move at a better pace because the next presidential election is already in the media, and we are seeing that takeover politics on the hill. i am saying for the regulators to move quickly before the politics of a presidential election dominates all of washington that we cannot get anything done. get as much done as we can in the time we are given, and faithfully implement this bipartisan law. >> from a regulators

perspective, politics should not be hugely important. it is a matter of rulemaking. why are you worried about the political process interfering? rep. mchenry: it interferes with everything. as much as i would like to put blinders on and get to work, that is not how washington works. that hold up, the political cycle, i want to make sure there is a force against inaction and slowness, against skepticism, and try forward to get relief -- and drive forward and get relief for these institutions. we talk about politics, but the effect is what i am trying to get. the effect of these institutions is so significant, and that is what i want to stay focused on. those people in my community that need more choices for how they do their banking, for community institutions to stay in business with this additional

regulatory burden put on them, and provide enough relief so they can continuously go on. >> speaking of big banks, let's talk about wells fargo. you have been critical of them, and they have not seems to right the ship. you talked about the role of shareholders and what they have to say versus what congress does. what congress does specifically, your committee, what is your thought on wells fargo? rep. mchenry: this was bipartisan oversight, that is what it looks like. you have a company not following the law or regulation, had been fined by every regulator in a short period of time based off of strong reportage out of the los angeles times is what motivated the regulators to act. there is necessary oversight to look at the regulators and say, why does it take a los angeles time story to get off your hide

and get to act? why did you find out about it from reporters and not the regulatory institution? what is this institution doing to their customers on an ongoing basis? why have the regulators continue to fine them, and not give them any out for their bad actions? or a path forward out of the consent decrees they are under. we brought wells fargo forward, we had the ceo and chairman testify. you saw bipartisan decision because they are failing to comply. that is proper oversight from congress. it is not pro-business or antibusiness, it is proconsumer, pro competition, pro-marketplace. while shareholders have the say for the institution, our regulators and laws must be

complied with. this institution was not complying with those things. the shareholders have to account for that, so those three sectors, lawmakers, regulators, and their shareholders have driven action out of this very important national coverage. i think you can see that as a good act by congress to step forward and ride this -- and to drive this conversation. there will be more work to be done because it is a large institution, they have yet to make the turn they need to, even though you have a second executive in two years. >> do you expect they will be back before the committee? >> i do not have the gavel. i have my opinions about the committee action, i have laid that out with chairman waters on what i think would be the right set of hearings and legislation we need for the congress. she has the gavel and can make

those decisions. we agree in some areas and disagree in others. we can function as a committee and try to find consensus where we can amidst bigger medical -- bigger political issues and day-to-day legislation can still occur. i think that is positive. >> one of the big fights is over disaster aid for states affected by various storms and floods. the president has more recently requested money for humanitarian assistance at the border. do you have concerns about trying to meld those considering how immigration has been of late? rep. mchenry: when you have a compromised product, you have a compromise. we need to keep the government open, and fund disasters, keep the government open and funding what is necessary at the border. because of the humanitarian issues there the wall and the

president's request on the border security measure, which i support, i think there is a bipartisan deal to be had absent the more polarizing elements. that is what tends to happen around government funding measures. the vote on disaster this disaster bill, the democrats who hold the gavel's in the house, and the speaker will have to work something out with republicans if they want a bill enacted into law. they did not get a veto override, so they need to come back and talk to republicans to get down to bipartisan cooperation to take care of these national disasters and the border. >> the government is funded until october 1.

you don't think this will not be resolved until much later? rep. mchenry: my hope is it is dealt with before then. it is up to the willingness of the democrats in the speaker to come to the table and have republican cooperation to get a bipartisan bill out of the house. >> you mentioned working with chairman waters to work on bipartisan issues. one of those you brought up was the potential hearing of the fed balance sheet, which you noted is operationally independent of congress. i am curious what your goal was suggesting that hearing? rep. mchenry: this is a serious issue, this is the second largest -- there are two portfolios the government owns. one is the fed balance sheet, and other is fannie mae and freddie mac and their balance sheet.

we have had no hearings about those two issues this year. it is important we have that conversation. the fed, when they announced about interest rates, that became the news. the real news is that the end of the year, i do not understand why, their long-term economic view that has not been directly answered in many media outlets and even with the new transparency of the fed and what powell has attempted to do which is built on yellen and bernanke's effort of the open public posture. i think we need to get deeper on why they are stopping the balance sheet runoff that was what they agreed upon two years ago, and has now been halted. it is a consequential decision without much public clarity.

>> are you not in favor of the fed holding a large balance sheet? rep. mchenry: i do not know why they are making that decision as a policy maker. is that decision borne out of government deficits long-term and debt long-term? is it what our economic activity looks like globally? what is the view between the eu economy, the question of brexit, chinese debt load, how all those things drive the conversation on the fed board of governors. the fed meeting minutes, we will know why they made this decision. in the short run, we need some understanding as a policy maker what this means for the american economy and consumer next year and the following year.

>> next week is the primary in north carolina's ninth district where we have seen quite a bit of chaos. where do you think the gop is at the end of this? do you see some reshuffling, and what are the prospects? rep. mchenry: it has been quite a primary. this is a neighboring district to mine. it has been interesting to watch. i have not endorsed any candidates. what happens with this primary will dictate whether or not republicans are in a competitive situation for the special election. the two leading candidates, one is a realtor, one is a state senator, they have gotten the most media attention. if the state senator avoids a runoff, or the realtor, then you

have an earlier election date. that means you have a normalized turnout situation across the district. if you have a later election date, charlotte local elections are held that day, and charlotte has more democratic votes, therefore it is an advantage to the democratic candidate. there are a lot of equations that went into the timing of the special election by the democratic governor in our state. it does have real consequences on the potential outcome. >> where do you set expectations for republicans chances of taking back the house majority next year? rep. mchenry: i am optimistic. our candidate recruitment is more diverse than previous election cycles. we have more interest in these competitive seats. i chaired candidate recruitment

so i have seen how this works up close. susan brooks is leading the effort. the congresswoman of new york is doing a focused job on not just recruiting female candidates, but also ensuring they are connected more broadly in a way that has not been about an effort among house republicans. what susan and lisa are doing our great additives and helpful to republicans broadly. >> that is it for our time. you will have to come back more frequently. rep. mchenry: thank you for having me, i enjoyed the conversation. >> you are watching c-span's "newsmakers." congressman mchenry. believe republican on the financial servicesthe financiale and house of representatives. want to start with you on the

working of the committee. as chairman maxine waters is one of the focal points of trying to get the financial records from the trump family. i am wondering about what level of working relationship there is on the committee as a result. >> we do see them working together on issues like flood insurance, but they are going their separate ways on oversight into the trumpet ministration. -- on the trump administration. i thought the congressman's answer on subpoenas was interesting because he did acknowledge risk for lawmakers if the courts ruled against them. that could have long-term negative impact in terms of their ability to do oversight. at the same time, he said he thought this was a personal vendetta against the president. amongst aat tension lot of republican lawmakers, that they are worried this could end up limiting their ability to do oversight on future presidents. >> we are seeing these themes about the constitutional

workings between the branches of government service on capitol hill. what is your take on what level of working relationship congress can have with this extra layer of scrutiny of the trump administration? >> it is an interesting question. i think the trump administration has put the republicans in congress, especially ones who been outspoken like representative mchenry, in an interesting position. he has for a long time, even recently, talked about the fed in ways the president is directly at odds with. for example, he was just telling us he is interested in looking at the size of the fed's balance sheet. the president has been very vocal about wanting that balance sheet to remain vague. he is even called for a return to quantitative easing. i think that underlies this back-and-forth that is going on here where the president is not always a traditional republican. the more traditional republicans

on the hill are sometimes less really having to walk a fine line on comedic age and. -- communication. >> the congressman made the point that everything is about politics. they are certainly doing a lot to increase the number of women in a more diverse candidate pool. he talked about that. traditionally, the challenge has been getting those republican women through the primaries. that is an interesting question to watch as we see the primary next week and then as those start coming in next year. stefon mae that her focus, to help women get through the primaries. we do not have a lot of examples of that being successful. isk at i'm thinking about the point -- >> what i'm thinking about is

the point you just made. hand theuess on one president has handed these republicans perhaps the best talking point available, which is a very strong economy. the trump tax cuts and the spending package certainly have fed into stronger growth. last year we saw a real move up in gdp relative to what we had been seeing before. that happened as expected on the back of that spending. if you see that sustained into the election, that will be a -- it is an easy thing to talk about. who does not like growth in jobs? the problem will be if this proves to be a fiscal sugar high and wears off going into the election. then you have divisions and weaker growth to contend with. >> it is hard to keep the president focused on the economy , even when he is seeing good economic numbers. any number of other fights are popping up on a daily basis that

the attention of the countries -- country and lawmakers get focused on instead. even the republicans will love to talk about the economy all the time, they do not manage to do that. guestnk you for being our and thank you for coming back. >> the complete guide to congress is now available. it has lots of details about the house and senate for the current session of congress. contact and bio information about every senator and her percentage of, plus information about congressional committees, state governors, and the cabinet. the 2019 congressional directory is a handy spiral-bound guide. order your copy from the c-span online store for $18.95. tv, todayican history at 6:00 p.m., on american

artifacts, toward the rise of exhibit on the lgbtq rights movement at the newsy him on the 50th anniversary of new york's stonewall riots. the gay wallon street workers who socialize their. there was a black male ring going on. nothing isis place, but it was a place that gay people could call their own. nicest place, but it was a place gay people could call their own. tapes,ou listen to these the president said this, this, did claire do that, -- declared that. find anything that says the president gave an order were acknowledged criminality. it is just not there. >> this weekend on american history tv on c-span3. now a conversation with

stacey abrams, founder of fair fight action and a 2018 credit nominee for governor of georgia. -- democratic nominee for governor of georgia. she spoke about the role diversity played international affairs. the council on foreign relations hosted this event. it is just over an hour. [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon, everyone. glad to see we have a lively crowd, a full house. i think you are going to be very happy with the next hour or so, but first a little bit before we get to the highlight of the afternoon. i am senior vice president here at the council. it is my great honor and pleasure to welcome you to this keynote address and closing session of the 7th annual conference on diversity in international affairs.