committee on the modernization of congress, the chair derek kilmer democrat of washington state and the vice chair william timmons think you both for being here. guest: congress realizes things are not working the way they would like to. the modernization of congress it has been nicknamed and was really given the mission of just trying to make congress work better for the american people. it was about four years ago, a new congress was coming in there was a lot of discussion about potential changes to rule and as those discussions were underway the members on both sides of the aisle recognize that some of the problems aren't just about rules. there are things like how we

make sure that congress is an institution can retain and have talented and diverse staff. how does congress use technology in a way that serves the interest of our constituents and how we have more collaborative culture. our committee was set up to grapple with some of those issues, to make recommendations on some of those issues with the goal of making reforms within the institutions so it works better. host: congressman timmons defined modernization. >> so much has changed. really we're just trying to make the institution the best for the american people. more efficient, more transparent. we are using a lot of technology that people use in their daily life. using pdfs to digitally sign documents, we are trying to figure out how to get wi-fi into our district office.

it has been an experience and i think the american people will be better for it. host: was it bipartisan? guest: it was 100% bipartisan. we literally have to work together. it's been an incredible learning experience. we build relationships, we got results. 202 recommendations have been made. we still have work to do, the committee is coming to an end but i do believe we will continue to work in the next congress. host: 87 partially implemented, congressman kilmer you require a bipartisanship, there is not more democrats are more republicans on this committee. guest: that was intentional. when the committee was established there was a decision

has to be bipartisan or is just going to flip back and forth every time congress hands over the gavel to the other party. in the consequence we decided if you want things to work differently in congress you have to do things differently. what is that look like? when we started up with this committee the first thing that happened is the committee gets its budget. with every other committee simple math, democrats use their half of the money they usually hire people with the democratic background, republican stick their half and hire people with republican background. our committee didn't do that. here's a great idea why don't we does have one staff? some will be democrats will be republicans but they will put on jerseys that say let's fix congress together. it was fundamental in terms of the culture of our committee.

if you watch one of our hearings on c-span, you may have too much time on your hands but if you do watch one you will notice a few things. we don't sit with democrats on one side and republicans on the others. why? because when we hear the witness is to lean over to the person next he is a that's interesting what you think about that? when you do that, you are doing it to someone from a different party. we don't even sit on a dais we sit at a roundtable. i have never had a good conversation speaking to the guy -- sitting to the back of somebody's head. we sit at a roundtable where we can make eye contact and that's not cosmetic. consequences we have been able to support both democrats and republicans passed more than 200 recommendations all of which were bipartisan and all of which were important as we try to make

a congress that works better for the american people. host: the changes have been made. >> you can sort of go issue by issue. staffing was a big issue. the amount of turnover has been significant. congress seems to be struggling. art of the reason for that is you have seen this sort of frequent bottom my station -- when you watch social media hearings and it looks like congress is being outgunned because congress is getting outgunned in those dialogues. how congress is as an institution, do a better job of reached -- recruiting and having a more diverse staff. being able to compensate staff better and some of it is actually having some hr capacities within the institution. congress is a very unique body

and 435 independent contractors doing their own thing. we tried to provide some centralization so that offices can do a better job on boarding their staff. better development opportunities, training opportunities for staff. i will mention one other, i'm sure william has some thoughts as well. we were not assigned the topic of looking at issues related to civility and collaboration. it became clear when our committee was doing the work that one of the big impediments to progress is the amount of conflict in the institution. we talked to management consultants, organizational can psychologists to think about how do we make this institution a place that is focused on progress, not on the jerry springer show. the good news is we actually

made a number of recommendations. it's happening right now. when i talk to an organizational psychologist at the end of the conversation he said he took over a team with a really bad culture and turned it into a winner. i call it football coach and i said what are you doing? you have football players actively try to sabotage the team he said i cut them. i said we don't have that option. he said well i bench them i said we don't have that option either is it how do you on board new players? i said we do have orientation when new members come on, we are doing it right now there are new members who are here. he said how did it work? it worked entirely the wrong way. you show up for orientation if your democrats you get on this bus, republicans you get on that bus. the entire orientation process is designed to keep the two parties apart. he said i don't know much about congress but it sounds like you ought to stop doing that.

so one recommendation was to stop doing that. i've collaboration and discussion between the two parties in relationship development. we had about a dozen recommendations in that space trying to figure out how do we have some intentional just change above incentives to get democrats and republicans to try. i think one of the things that frustrates the american people is the institution doesn't even seem capable of moving forward. so we made a number of recommendations that could be jake game changers over time. host: and from you? >> 2019 we were in d.c. 65 full-day days and we traveled 66 days. we were at the airport more than we were working. that is not a way to run the place. we recommended to change the

schedule to be in d.c. more the biggest challenge is our members serve in committees and subcommittees. we also have floor reps. we are all over the capital complex and we are never where we need to be to do our job. committee work is important. i have been on three committees and rarely, there has been more than three or four people in the room when i get my chance to speak. everybody has overlapping obligations. so d conflicting the calendar and the schedule is incredibly them. we have seen a lot of progress there. hopefully we will have a common schedule for committee calendars. really understanding the challenges and where we can streamline the calendar to allow people to be in their committee. host: how does the common calendar work? >> we are still working on that.

at the end of the day is just an application where the chairman would put in the calendar and they will be able to see where the members on their committees have overlaps in obligations. it's a step to say if you schedule on tuesday, 63% of your committee has a conflict if you do it at 11, 40 3% has a conflict so that's a step in the right direction. eventually once we get it in one place we will be able to do block scheduling generally speaking. people serve on all types of committees. we will be able to do a block schedule. again, just the first step towards d conflicting the schedule to allow members to be in their chairs and engage in meaningful dialogue. we speak to the camera and we go

do something else we need to be able to answer questions about their ideas. that's how we can actually move the fall -- ball forward. collaborative manner and mutual respect, we don't do that. the recommendations we made will facilitate that. i think that's going to make a huge impact. host: i'm sure viewers will be curious about proxy voting. what avenue does your committee advocate for? guest: it will not be next congress. i think long term is legitimate concern surrounding people that are ill or are having children. it's something that will be considered but i think next congress we will go back to know proxy voting. it's something future congresses can consider but i think it has been interestingly abused. we won't get into that right now. >> it's on both sides of the

aisle, i will say that. host: congressman comer where are you on that issue? guest: that was appropriate during the covid pandemic if there is a legitimate public health concern not to put themselves or others at risk. you know i think as we got past the pandemic the new majority will have to determine if it's a time to end that or whether it's important to keep it but i do think there was a real legitimate reason to establish it when you are in the middle of a global pandemic host: i want to talk about, you touched on this a little bit. bipartisan government in your recommendation. nine partisan member orientation is what you talked about making it more comprehensive and promoting civility during the new member orientation. is that happening? >> it is and we have had incredible reviews from the freshman coming in. there was an event is monday

night where there was a bipartisan and everyone got to know one another it was very well received. in addition to orientation, we had a lot of recommendations regarding spending in the capital is challenging to find neutral ground to engage in house discussions. it's is incredibly challenging just to break bread. it should be very easy for these members to sit down and have a meal and interact with us. we are making strides in that regard just tuesday night we had a civility dinner at the library of congress. it was incredible. we have 40 plus members, probably a hundred people overall and we spent two hours together talking about the challenges we face in getting to know one another. i just think it's really challenging if you know one another. i've always said i've been elected office for six years now

and just combat someone on an issue does amenable work with them. host: on rissman,? guest: -- congressman kilmer? guest: planning retreats. a member of that committee can sit down and say i have never been part of an institution until i got to congress that didn't define success at the beginning of a process. when i got to congress i was kind of amazed that this doesn't happen. we actually got a nice room at the library of congress. we sat around the table and started off by trying to get to know each other a little bit. what would be interesting to your viewers is if you were a fly on the wall during that conversation you wouldn't be able to tell who the republicans or democrats were.

the institution i am serving in has lower approval ratings then colonoscopies and the rock band nickelback. i think it's important. another recommendation that doesn't seem like a big deal but i think could change and that is to allow when a bill is introduced when a person of each party works on that bill for there to be to lead sponsors of the bill. right now, and i had a campaign bill that i worked on a couple of congress is back and i worked on it really diligently with one of my republican colleagues. we spent hours together, stuff together working on this legislation to land on something that could get support from both democrats and republicans. when we introduced the bill we literally flipped a coin to see whose name would be on the bill. if it's a joint project it should be something that both

members own. that was one of my recommendations is to allow two people to lead a bill. i think that's good to be in important step. it's a made -- minor change in incentive. host: i want to encourage our viewers to join us this morning. we want to get your comments and reactions from these two lawmakers and also any recommendations you have for modernizing congress, republicans (202) 748-8001. (202) 748-8000. and independents (202) 748-8002. remember you can text us (202) 748-8003 and you can also join us on instagram and on facebook.com/c-span. ellie you are up first in new jersey, independent, good morning. caller: not be so divisive a lot

of things, try to separate the american people and one way we can really bring people together is over the policies. i think our founding fathers called for is a bill in congress right now which is hr 9110 and s -- i think it would be a unifying thing for the unit -- american people. guest: thank you for your question. a couple months ago i have to take a look at those bills. some of the high interest rates on the student loans, that's unreasonable. i know it's a real challenge for many people in this country. i'm not sure about forgiving student loans but congress should make changes to make it easier for people to pay off

student loans and pursue the american dream by advancing education. that something i think everybody can agree on. and congress can help the american people. host: steve in maryland, democratic caller. or is this kelly? caller: this is kelly, yeah. host: did you get an answer? caller: yes i did. host: ok, thank you. >> there are some healthy areas where republicans and democrats can work together. challenges they face around the economy right now and things like student debt are not limited to blue or red districts. that is something you see in all districts. we see areas around our committee were democrats and republicans have been able to find common ground. you see issues related to

military issues and the oak we would crisis. all of these areas can see significant reforms were democrats and republicans have been able to work together. i don't think it's reasonable that student loan debt is one of the few things you cannot discharge in bankruptcy. that's why i'm supportive of enabling people to be able to discharge student loan debt. host: washington is facing another fiscal deadline over funding the feral government. the annual budgeting process the establishment of a progrsion only directed program that calls for accountability. the program under article one of the constitution to appropriate

federal dollars this has been fully implemented i understand? >> yes. host: explain why and what are the benefits? guest: article one of the constitution congress has the power, as a member of congress and know that me and my district i know it better. they are 3000 miles away from the district i represent. i think there was a desire to ensure that members of congress exercise the power of the first and dedicate funding to community projects in their district but a recognition for that there needed to be substantial guardrails around it. it would be limited both in terms of dollar amount, how much of the budget could be comprised of these community projects, very transparent so that members of congress when they request a community project for their district all of that information is available to the american

public, to the press, to everyone to see exactly what is being requested to actually have to attest to the fact that there is no conflict of interest. make sure it's only going to nongovernmental entities or nonprofits that are serving a governmental purpose. let me talk about what that looks like. in my hometown, they just were able to use project funding to purchase the food bank in the community which i grew up. they have just been able to purchase the property so they're not flushing money down the toilet every month on rent. they were able to purchase the property so the dollars can be dedicated towards actually serving the population that really needs some help. for example, three of the coastal tribes in my district in the process of moving to higher ground because of the threat of tsunamis. i do make some of those

infrastructure investments at higher ground. we are seeing the ability to invest in affordable housing. that's not unique to washington state's congressional district. members of congress can champion some of those needs all throughout the country and i think over time, the benefit of that will be that one will better meet the needs of the american people. host: do you agree? >> i do think that the reason is because of debt. fast forward a decade and the debt has gone up double. i don't know if that was necessarily the best argument. i definitely see the chairman's point and i think we will continue to see the benefit of community funding as of now it's going to be for next congress.

we get another congress and we will continue to check in and make sure there is nothing abused. it is very different. lack of transparency, abuse, a number of other things. so the guardrails that our committee recommended take into account those concerns. there are still questions regarding seniority and other things but i do think it's much better than it was and we will continue to see our country. host: our audience will remember. republican from pennsylvania, good morning. caller: i have a suggestion you guys ought to do. the biggest problem in congress and senate. first of all, stop

gerrymandering. stop it altogether. second of all, it doesn't have to be done the way it is now. the full senate to vote on it and the house to vote on it, not people behind the door same people become alien heirs. host: let me take both of those ideas. guest: gerrymandering is bad. when you look at districts that are very strangely shaped you have to wonder it shouldn't be that way. it just shouldn't be that way. there is a lot of challenges to drawing district lines. it is a part of the process. there is federal law that requires majority and minority districts. but i definitely agree with you that we should make districts look more reasonable and if there square were not in the

right direction but i agree with you it is challenging because there are federal laws. i will let the chairman take the bottom of it. host: how gracious of you. >> we did make the recommendation early on in the committee's progress. trying to improve transparency around lobbying so that the american public will be able to understand better who is trying to lobby congress on what issue to make sure there is a single identifier of that lobbyist and i think you'd be able to look at, ok, this is a lobbyist here are the issues for which they are lobbying. right now that is a very opaque process. i really do believe some of this is effective and it's one of the reasons our committee made that reform proposal. host: is a or no? >> that one is, i think in

process. host: and how would it be implemented? >> technology could solve a pretty significant problem. we have a single identifier, you have to register and you have to register all your clients. it can't be, for example, under multiple names. i will use my father as an example. you have to be one identification number and all your clients, that is not currently the case in congress. this is not a huge problem to solve it involves simple technology. any -- have all your clients listed. i don't know if the existing covers that. again, i'm a big believer in transparency and making sure that the american public knows what is going on. host: met from virginia,

democratic color. caller: a comment and then a question. my comment is basically the choice of voting i think it does a good job of getting moderate candidates elected because if you look at alaska the very right wing candidates, sarah palin could not make it over the finish line because moderate voters had a chance to vote for their second best option and that person one versus the extremists. then my question for you is i have a problem with the unrepresentative nature of our current congressional districts. i feel like we should decrease the amount of people that are represented by an individual representative. there is no, light, specific law that says the current congressional districts have to be represented by the current amount of people.

we could change that and make it so the fewer people are represented by one person and you actually have a chance to meet and talk with the representative versus them only meeting with lobbyists, associations, and groups because they don't have time to meet with you. host: ok, matt. >> the committee held hearings on the big ideas. changing the site of congress we were not able to come to any agreement this is a pertinent issue. i do agree that it's challenging representing 700 plus thousand people. especially when my cell phone number is everywhere and everyone uses it. i think this is going to be an issue. i do not think south carolina would go along with that. we will continue to monitor how

we sent people to washington. guest: how we choose our candidates, how we choose our members, that supports the institution and its effectiveness. the state of washington has the top tier primary system. read districts the general election is usually between two republicans and deep blue districts it's usually two democrats. what we have seen, the minority party generally votes for the more interest candidate and that has had an impact. i will share, when i first got to congress, after orientation we had to come to a committee first term. they called all the freshman numbers. with the joint chiefs, the bus rolled in. it was my first week on the job so i said i'm going to go grab a burger.

if anyone wants to come, come on. we went to a burger joint and were talking and breaking bread. about 45 minutes and i said it seems likely got to get our act together and get some stuff done. when my new republican colleagues, who actually became a very good friend, he said i really like you but here's what you understand he said i would my seat by being the republican incumbent. he said the first foot i cast was a vote against speaker bader . i sent a press release after that saying i voted against because it was too compromising. he said i -- you don't understand i like you but i'm here to stop you. i, wife and i said was your reaction to this? this is a big problem. a lot of it is driven by things we talked about partisan uc the

districts get more blue or red. in the partisan primaries where it's really easy for a candidate to try to make it through a primary. this is one of the reasons that we looked at this issue when we had what we called our big idea hearings. we were not able to land the plan that two thirds of our committee could support. i think it's a legitimate issue. good we make a recommendation to increase the size of the house? the average member of congress had a district that was 31,000 people. a lot easier to engage your constituents if you have 31,000 people over three quarters of a million people. i do think there is value and you seen there was talk by the

academy i actually encourage viewers to take a look at that. i think it lays out a very reasonable argument for why there should be at least some increase in the size of the institution so instead of capacity to meet the needs of your constituents. host: for our viewers who want to learn more about this c-span covers many of these hearings. you can go to modernize congress. house.gov. you can follow them on twitter at modernize committee that's cmt e. thank you both of you for coming out together, for store and on demand at c-span.org. let's hear from alisha, hi we are an open forum. caller: hi, greta.

i think they should do away with writers. like someone like john mccain did. he put the writer in. in with the military he

what was benjamin franklin? he was a free libertarian. i'd like to know possibly what we are doing with our 750 million acres of natural resources. i know we like to keep it in reserve because we do have a future. our natural resource base, we can power the world for i think about 300, 400 years. i don't understand the debate here. so could you present that question to our polarized pumpkin eaters because they're the ones that control the leases to these properties. thank you. host: all right. jozy. jozy in san fernando, you got to

mute that television. it's your turn. oh, jose. excuse me. that's why. caller: yeah, that's why. jose. host: sorry about that. caller: i got some concerns about california and why we are putting -- why we're putting 50, 51 all the time when it seems like it feels like, you know -- host: you got to mute that television. otherwise we get the feedback. difficult to hear you. joan in charlotte, north carolina. republican. caller: good morning, greta. i was listening -- i've been listening for years. i'm 80 years old. and i was listening yesterday morning. this gentleman called in and he made a good suggestion. why are the independents on the democratic side?

if they're independent they should not be on either side. so that's the question i got. host: the caucus with one party or the other, sometimes the independent go to the republican side depending which way they lean. they get committee assignments they prefer if they caucus with the -- with the party that's in power or the party that they align with. so that's generally why you see them choosing one party or the other. kevin in manaway, ohio, independent. hi, kevin. good morning. caller: hi. how you guys doing? this is still open forum? host: yes. what's the public policy issue on your mind? caller: i guess i want to take it back to the railway strike. i guess i am frustrated it seals like democrats in power are

congratulating themselves and i think it seems to me that the house, knowing full well that the seven-day sick leave wasn't going to pass in the senate. used the opportunity to self-congratulatory. and i want to point out, i feel like this is a perfect example of corporate socialism. i had seen that bernie sanders said that ted cruz -- oh, hey, i see you're a socialist. yes, because he's a corporate socialist. i think it's a scary time in america where workers are going to be forced by the government to go back to work and not strike when they democratically chose within their workplace to not agree to the conditions or whatever were in their contract. host: go ahead.

finish your thought, kevin. caller: i will say in america if we really want a democratic society we need to democratize the workplace and the means of production and that's it. host: last night at the white house, a celebration of the u.s.-french alliance. the president hosting the french president and his wife of the official state dinner. there you see under a pavilion at the white house grounds. celebrities, democratic donors, republican lawmakers of congress, and others all gathered for the festivities. mr. -- the french president, emmanuel macron, and his wife arriving in washington, d.c., earlier in the week. they had a welcome ceremony at the white house yesterday and then that followed the state dinner last night. if you're interested in who attended this affair, you can find the guest list in the

washingtonpost.com. i'm sure you can find it online as well. they have everybody that attended, including the president's children, hunter biden and others, members of his family were all there. and as we said, republican lawmakers, democratic lawmakers, celebrities, etc., all attended the festivities. we are in open forum this morning. any public policy issue that's on your mind. yesterday, when the president met with the french president, emmanuel macron, at the white house, they talked about issues for three hours. after that the two of them held a joint news conference. at that news conference, president biden made some news in saying that he would meet with russian president vladimir putin under certain conditions. [video clip] president biden: there is one way for this to end, a rational way, putin to pull out of

ukraine, number one. but it appears he's not going to do that. he's paying a very heavy price doing it but he's inflicting incredible, incredible carnage on the civilian population of ukraine. bombing nurseries, hospitals, children's homes. it's sick what he's doing. but the fact of the matter is i have no immediate plans to contact mr. putin. mr. putin -- choose my words very carefully -- i'm prepared to speak with mr. putin if in fact there is an interest in him deciding he's looking for a way to end the war. he hasn't done that yet. if that's the case, in consultation with my french and my nato friends, i'll be happy to sit down with putin to see what he has in mind. he hasn't done that yet. in the meantime, i think it's absolutely critical what

emmanuel said. we must support the ukrainian people. the idea that putin is ever going to defeat ukraine is beyond comprehension. imagine trying to occupy that country for the next two, five, 10, 20 -- if they could, if they could. he's miscalculated every single think he initially calculated. he thought he'd be greeted with open arms by the russian-speaking portions of the ukrainian population. go back and read his speech when he invaded when i said they were going to invade and they did when i said they were. go back and read the speech he made. he talked about needing to be another peter of the great. he talked about the need for the people of kyiv as the mother lode of russian identity in the beginning, etc., etc. he's just miscalculated across the board. and so the question is, what is

his decision -- how does he get himself out of the circumstance he's in? i'm prepared, if he's willing to talk, to find out what he's willing to do but i'll only do it in consultation with my nato allies. i'm not going to do it on my own. host: president biden at that joint white house news conference with the french president yesterday. you can find it and the points of interest if you go to our website, c-span.org. you'll find gold stars at the bottom. that note points of interest from all the questions they took from reporters. we're in public policy forum, open forum for the next five minutes. the house is gaveling in early for legislative business. as we told you at the top the senate yesterday approved a rail deal that would avoid a rail strike by forcing an agreement between the rail unions and the rail companies. that was approved in the senate

80-15-1. senator rand paul, a libertarian of kentucky, voted present on that. passage of that in the senate followed passage of it in the house where it was approved 290-137. now we learned that president biden will sign it into law this morning 10:15 a.m. eastern time and he'll deliver remarks. you can follow along on our website c-span.org. john in missouri, democratic caller. good morning to you, john. what's the issue on your mind? caller: hello. i was hearing about this -- dang it. i got two of them. ok. the railroad strikers, i believe that biden is right for forcing them to go to work. but he should also force companies to give them that seven days sick pay. and also believe -- the other

thing about biden -- what's the other thing about biden? host: all right, john, we'll move on. some other headlines for you in the public policy forum. student loan debt cases going before the supreme court. they agreed to take it up. this is "the wall street journal." oral arguments will be in february and a decision will come down in june. and then, also from "the wall street journal," an appeals court ordered an end to the so-called special master process for reviewing documents seized from former president trump's mar-a-lago residence, delivering a major boost to the justice department continuing criminal investigation. couple of tweets here from our viewers. since the labor union has been granted special favor by the government, it's within the right of that government to take away that privilege for cause. referring to the action by congress this week to force that labor deal. you also have ben from michigan

saying, i am retired after 30 years of -- after 34 years of the railroad. it's a difficult job and they need sick days. i saw going from five-man train crews to two-man train crews. and you think this huge increase for railroad workers is an insulated incident? all unions will want huge increases also and nonunions will demand it and all because of biden's inflation which will create more inflation. congress should resist its dog to the dinner bell impulses to intervene and private tusles unless the railroads have been nagsized. stay out. a vibrant country like us will

move on. hartford, connecticut. on this issue. another win for joe biden and the american people. the republicans backed the railroad and would not give sick leave while they have unlimited sick leave in the senate. one case of covid could cost the railroad workers their job. >> so good morning, everyone. thank you for joining us for today's meeting of the d.n.c. rules and bylaws committee. i'm from the district of columbia and i, along with my co-chair, jim roosevelt, will be entertaining you today. i thought i'd open it up with a laugh. before we begin, please join me in the pledge of allegiance.

i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. thank you. we're joined on this occasion by d.n.c. chair jamie harris. chair harrison led us through this historic mid-term election. one which truly demonstrates the importance of investing in year-round organizing. his long-term commitment to the grassroots has paid off beyond our electoral victories. through his leadership, we've developed a party that reflects the diversity of the electorate and welcomes every voice to take a seat at the table. chairman harris, would you like to offer a few words to the committee? chairman harrison: thank you,

co-chair. good morning, everybody. if my northern southern drawl may be a little more drawly than normal, right before thanksgiving i got a wisdom tooth taken out and shortly thereafter i got a dry socket. so i've been hopped up on some medicines. so if i'm a little roopy, you know why. but folks, let me just say first and foremost, let me thank jim and minyon. i want to thank them for their warm welcome. i want to thank them for their service to the d.n.c. we all owe a big debt of gratitude to these two amazing members of the d.n.c. and our co-chairs of the rules and bylaws committee. [applause] but that debt of gratitude is also extended to every member of this august committee. the rules and bylaws committee is -- does so much of the hard

work of the d.n.c. you know, rules is really the thing that -- by which we're governed by. so i want to thank all of the members of this committee. i also want to thank all -- also our d.n.c. staff. folks who work in after in, day after day to just make sure you all have the information, the materials that are necessary. this staff, led by sam cornell, my executive director, mary beth cahill, who is our senior advisor, veronica martinez, her foet yoel is -- portfolio is this committee. nick and so many others, i just want to thank you all for the hard work and the efforts you have made to make this committee work and all of our committees work to do their work. so thank you, all. [applause] folks, when i appointed the

membership of this committee, i knew that we had some of the best minds in the democratic party. minds that are focused on being good stewards of this party. minds that are reflective of the values of the white house. but i'm truly blown away, my friends, by the level of commitment and the thoughtfulness by which you have taken this process. i know we're not at the finish line, but i also want to thank you all for conducting a process that our party can be proud of. this has been a thorough, open, and transparent process. the committee has held nine public meetings, along with four public listening sessions and an online portal for public feedback. 20 states, 20 states applied to be in the early window. and in june, 16 states and puerto rico were chosen to present their case about why they should be moved to the early state window. so with th