mccarthy. lawmakers will vote on the ruse and some of the proposed rules is a motion to vacate a chair and the requirement that all bills be posted 72 hours before a final vote. and with the start of the new congress, covid-19 rules for allowing proxy voting. and lawmakers are to take up legislation to rescind funding for i.r.s. agents. preorder your copy of the congressional droact tower of the 118th congress and access to the federal government with bio and can't information for every house and senate and the president's cabinet, scan the code at the right to preorder

rly spring delivery. and every purchase supports our operations at cspanshop. org. walk us through the mechanis and what to expect this week after the election. thanks for joining us. guest: good to be here. host: last week, the vitriol we saw amongst these factions that played out in the election. does this continue on as far as the way they -- the technicalities of the house go forward? guest: absolutely. i think this is just the start, where you have the various factions, the conservative wing, the moderate wing of the party facing off, going head to head. he saw a speaker race on the floor proceedings last week. this now carries into today, where lawmakers will fly back

into washington, d.c. and take up their gop rules package on the house floor. we have already heard from a couple of the more moderate, pragmatists in their gop conference. tony gonzalez of texas on the sunday show yesterday reiterating what he told us on the capital last week that he would vote against the gop rules package. nancy mace of south carolina saying moderate voters in her district in south carolina are not happy about some concessions kevin mccarthy gave up. she is on the fence. because we have this tight margin of four or five vote majority, if mccarthy loses too many on the rules package because democrats are unified together, that could create headaches again for kevin mccarthy. host: what is a rules package, why is it important to management of the house? guest: every new congress, we

are now in the 118th congress and 2023, gets to decide its own set of rules. we didn't see the house become a little bit of a wild, wild west as we were -- did get to see the house become a little bit of a wild, wild west. house cameras were allowed to shoot on the house floor, which is generally not the case. use our reporters -- you saw reporters talking to lawmakers on camera in areas we typically do not get to. there are a number of rules focused on things that happen on the house floor. there are things like this big rule change that would allow a single gop lawmaker, a single lawmaker in general, to bring a motion to vacate against kevin mccarthy, essentially allowing any lawmaker to call a vote to remove the speaker of the house in the middle of the congressional session.

there is a number of other really interesting rules. to name a few, more time to read bills before they come to the floor. it would create -- the republicans would create a select committee, a special committee august on the coronavirus pandemic. another special committee looking into the weaponization of the federal government against the american people, specifically they are going to look at things like the raid on mar-a-lago and donald trump and things like that. a number of things that house conservatives and the freedom caucus were able to negotiate with mccarthy. mccarthy making concessions to those conservatives in order to bring those votes into his column. host: our guest until 8:30, if you want to ask about this rules package and things to expected a as the house comes in. it is (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans.

(202) 748-8002 for independents. if you want to text us, (202) 748-8003. nancy mace, you mentioned yesterday on the sunday show talking about this rules package. i will play a little bit of what she had to say. [video clip] >> when they did the rules package at the end of the day, there was only one point changed on the motion to vacate. that was the only difference in the package we are voting on tomorrow. that was different from the original package proposed. my question is, today, what backroom deals were cut and did they get those? we should not be operating like nancy pelosi, this small faction. the other ones saying they were fighting the swamp, but yet went and tried to act like they actually are the swamp trying to do backroom deals. we do not know what they got or didn't get. we do not have any idea what promises were made or what gentlemen's handshakes were made.

we do not have any idea at this point. it does give me heartburn because that is not what we ran on. >> i had asked you initially about the rules package, which is published. and would be voted on tomorrow. our you saying you are going to withhold your vote on those published agreements until you know what these backroom deals were? >> i am considering that as an option right now. i like the rules package. it is the most open, fair and fiscally conservative package we have had in 30 years. what i do not support is the small number of people trying to get a deal done or deals done for themselves in private, in secret, to get a vote or vote present. i do not support that. host: scott wong, that is her assessment. talk about that and how widespread is that assessment shared with others, members of the conference? guest: so far, it is not super widespread. i did talk to don bacon, a swing

district moderate republican from nebraska late last week heading into that final boat for mccarthy - vote for mccarthy. he said he would likely be joining with the rest of the republicans in supporting the rules package. if enough republicans stood up and said we cannot know for this rules package, it would once again be pandemonium in the house of representatives because then, it would infuriate conservatives who cut this deal with mccarthy. we would have more gop infighting. these are just the opening days of the 118th congress. we have not really gotten into the meat of some of these tough issues. one other aspect of this rules package would be, we have to raise the debt ceiling later this summer. we are going to hit that

borrowing limit, congress will need to take proactive action to raise that debt ceiling so we do not default on our nations debt. that is something we have never done in the past. it is something that most people in congress do not want to see because it could be catastrophic for not only the nation's economy, but the world economy. conservatives want to tie that debt ceiling increase to some spending cuts. that is something mccarthy has agreed to. that is going to create another major headache down the road for this gop conference as they try to work out internally how to deal with that problem. democrats are just going to hang back and let republicans fight among themselves on these issues. host: when it comes to those spending cuts, are there specific targets to those in relation to the debt ceiling?

guest: not specifically spelled out. very general at this point. talking to a number of republicans, they do not necessarily want to cut so much on the defense side. this would likely target more discretionary, domestic spending. it could also bleed into some mandatory spending, things like entitlement, social security. perhaps medicare, although there is some reservation from republicans about targeting medicare because that obviously would be unpopular. that is where the government does spend a significant amount of money, with entitlement programs. everything will the on the table. we do not know where specifically they are going to target. host: scott wrong -- wong with us to talk about this rules package they expect later today. let's start with rick in

philadelphia, democrats line. go ahead. caller: good morning. thank you for allowing me to communicate with you guys this morning. two things i am concerned with. number one, this thing of allowing one member to request a reconsideration of the current speaker. is that just for republicans or every member? guest: every member of the house of representatives. any member can bring a motion to vacate. let's take a step back. this is a rule that was a long-standing rule in the house of representatives for decades and decades. almost never used except -- pedro, both you and i were here in 2015, when in the summer of that year, a gentleman by the name of mark meadows from north carolina brought a motion to vacate against then speaker john

boehner. that vote was never held. boehner was able to push that vote off for a couple of months. what he was hearing from his colleagues, republican colleagues, was that you cannot make me walk the plank and take this vote. this is going to be a difficult vote for me to take. i'm hearing from constituents in my district. what weiner ultimately decided to do was rather than force his colleagues to take that difficult vote about whether to oust him from the house of representatives, he decided to resign instead. those motions have consequences. nancy pelosi when she took over as speaker raised the threshold for the motion to vacate to a high level. now, what republicans have decided to do is bring that back down to a single member who can bring that motion to vacate. host: was that a house freedom congress -- caucus request to

lower the threshold? guest: it was in one of these negotiations with kevin mccarthy. caller: i appreciate him explaining it thoroughly. the other question was, when you use the term discretionary funding, that is basically as i understand it, affects the homeland. more so, those who need it the most. those who need be bp, who do not -- bbp, who do not have the ability to eat properly. those who need fha for housing, section eight. those who need social security. those who need medicare and medicaid. can you correct me if i am incorrect? guest: the way the caller laid it out was accurate. you have discretionary spending. that does cover a lot of those domestic, federal programs that

a lot of americans rely on. at the same time, you have the more mandatory spending entitlements, things like social security, long-standing, built-in programs that do not necessarily have to be renewed every year. they just exist, except when congress once you decide to go after them and take an ax to them. they are reluctant to do that because soma and americans either rely on them more are counting on them for the future of when they hit into retirement or when they need them for health care. host: new jersey, republican line. you are next. caller: good morning. i am calling today because i am calling on behalf of war veterans. i served in iraq and afghanistan . i was retired due to injury.

i want to support hr 1282, age of richard starling. many people do not know what to -- i just came upon it myself. amend title 10, united states code 610. expand eligibility to certain military retirees for concurrent receipt of veterans disability compensation and retired pay, or combat related special compensation and for other purposes. maybe this bill to us veterans with the help with the daily struggles and disabilities as veterans and families had to endure on a daily basis. war is not something we chose, it is an obligation and a higher calling to protect our country. i ask congress to please reconsider and pass this bill.

we did not leave our country behind when called to duty. i ask the nation to please reconsider. host: you are breaking up a little bit. talking about specific military bills, but military overall is a concern when it comes to spending. guest: certainly, because the bulk of our federal budget does go toward spending. that will be part of the discussion. republicans, specifically, who will now be taking control of the house of representatives have said they do not necessarily want to be spending more money on the war in ukraine. they would rather be bringing that money home and spending that money on americans. the funding for the war in ukraine will be out the center of this spending debate as we look at the spending across the

federal government. i would also note that this congress and the 117th congress did come together to address the major issue for veterans that passed the pact act, which provided health care services for people that had served abroad and been exposed to burn pits. veterans always top of mind for the united states congress, they did take action in the last congress. host: because of the deal made with the house freedom caucus, how much does that increase? guest: that is separate from the rules package. there were some side agreements that were made with kevin mccarthy, specifically three members of the house freedom caucus, the far right members of the gop conference, they are a nebulous group did we do not know exactly how many. some people say we are in the

freedom caucus, others do not say publicly. they did secure three spots on the very influential rules committee. just to explain what that is, the rules committee decides how exactly bills come to the floor in what form, when they come to the floor. very important in terms of packaging legislation together. they can package bills altogether as a big omnibus package and moved to the floor, they can break it all apart and try to pass things separately. that is a very important committee. it is tightly controlled by the speaker of the house. they have secured three spots on that important committee. separately, byron donalds, who was nominated against speaker mccarthy last week -- we saw him rise in notoriety as he was

challenging speaker mccarthy and freedom caucus members were rallying around him briefly. he will earn a seat on the steering committee, which is another tightly controlled committee by the speaker of the house. byron donalds, a conservative, african-american will be the speakers designee on that committee. these are a couple of examples of some of the things the freedom caucus was able to extract from kevin mccarthy. host: burning in kentucky, democrats line. hi. caller: good morning. the president and mitch mcconnell are at the foot of print sprint bridge in kentucky, considered the poster child of the crumbling infrastructure in this part of the country. i was wondering what congress's role, the house of representatives role would be in the funding for that project. a quick comment, you mentioned

don bacon and nancy -- they have been on your circle -- your show several times. i was a dim -- i am a democrat, but i would support that ticket if they were to run together in the next presidential election. i want to know what your comments on that. has anyone made any indication they want to run? guest: don bacon and nancy mace for president, i have not heard that ticket before but i suppose there will be a number of combinations we will be exploring in the months to come. in terms of the bridge in kentucky, we did see the split screen moment where the house of representatives in complete turmoil, unable to agree on a speaker of the house, the house of representatives was shut down last week. there was a number of concerns on whether they could even follow-up on constituent calls and emails. some new members of congress could not even access their email and communicate with constituents because they were

not sworn in members of the house, many could not attend classified briefings they normally would attend. there was a national security component. on the others things, we saw president joe biden joining hand in hand with top republicans at this bridge connecting kentucky and ohio. this was with mitch mcconnell, the gop leader in the senate. rob portman, the outgoing senator from ohio. the governor of ohio himself, mike dewine. this was a result of the infrastructure bill signed into law by president biden in the last congress that now we are starting to see the money go out to specific projects. you are going to see more of these types of press conferences announced by the administration, announced by governors in various states because money went to districts around the country, to every state and

territory. this was probably the start of that rollout of the bill they passed in the last congress. host: you mentioned members. a viewer off our twitter feed mentioned one of those viewers that got a lot of attention last week, george santos. what is the word on capitol hill as far as his future? guest: he probably doesn't have much of a future. you can see santos -- i was in the house chamber last week for the floor proceedings in addition to watching what kevin mccarthy was doing and what matt gaetz were doing, a lot of reporters were stocking and following to see what george santos was doing. he was floating on the floor from member to member, calling -- colleague to colleague. he is getting to know these people for the first time. they now know who he is by reputation because he largely fabricated his life story and juan his election -- won his

election in new york. it seems he was injecting himself a lot of times into various huddles that were happening on the floor. you could tell there were certain types of members of leadership, key negotiators huddled at certain times. there in the corner, george santos would be listening and sometimes chiming in. i am sure he was -- i do not think santos is going to be a member of the freedom caucus. it was fascinating to watch. i do not think is going to have much of a future in the house of representatives, given what has transpired these last couple of months with his personal narrative. host: will ethics get involved in investigating him? the ethics committee? guest: very likely. here is the challenge with the ethics committee, they can only

investigate sitting members of congress when infractions happened during the course of their service. i think there might be a question of, if he lied in the past about a campaign, is that something you can investigate in the ethics committee? it is an open question, but i am sure democrats and other rivals will try to file ethics complaints against him. that can happen and very likely will happen. host: scott wong is with us about the opening of congress, voting on's rules package. he is within bc news. lets hear from chris in florida. caller: how are you doing, scott? i think reporters are not doing their job properly. if you agree with me or socrates, ignorance is evil, we've got a lot of people who do

not understand how congress work . a gentleman called in earlier about changing the rules to have one person vacate. you said it has been that way for a long time. yeah, andrew james did with nancy palouse he -- palouse. he speaker -- the speaker should be controlling how operations work, not ruling with an iron fist. let me suggest we stop reporting on childish things. take for instance, have you reported on the fact c-span's cameras is why we saw everything? now, they do not. they do not control the cameras >> we are going to leave this to fulfill our commitment, the house returning to consider the rules of the 118th congress. the first order of business. some proposed changes is a

motion to vacate the chair which allows one member to remove the speaker and all bills posted 72 hours. covid rules allowing proxy voting and members participating virtually are not being allowed. later, members will rescind 8 # billion. live coverage of the house will be broadcast through the house-controlled cameras unlike last week when c-span showed all four days. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offer