free video app c-span.org. announcer: president-elect donald trump continues to fill g's depositions. he has selected carolyn levitt for his press secretary. she currently served as the assistant press secretary. at 27, she is the youngest person ever in the job of white house press secretary. president-elect trump has chosen stephen chung to be director of communications. most recently he served as communications director on the trump-vance campaign. sergio gore has been selected for another role. -- announcer: c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these

television companies and more, including charter communications. >> charter is proud to be recognized as one of the best internet providers, and we are just getting started, building 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those who need it most. announcer: charter communications supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers , giving you a front row seat to democracy. joining us now to discuss a gop-controlled senate in the 119th congress and president-elect trump's potential recess nominations is james wallner, a senior fellow at r street institute. welcome back to the program. guest: thanks for having me. host: remind people what the r street institute is. guest: it is a terrific

organization. it looks at real solutions for real problems. it is one of the best laces for creative inquiry in washington, d.c. today. it really tries to get above the stale left right dichotomy that has led us to this point, where many people feel pressured with paralysis and gridlock in d.c. i focus on the governance program. i focus on the constitution and how our system operates, but more specifically congress and the united states senate, something near and dear to my heart, having spent many years working there. i am fascinated by the rules, what can i say. host: we are going to talk about the senate for the next 45 minutes. this week, president-elect trump announced several key cabinet nominations and has asked republican leaders in the chamber to allow recess appointments. explain what that is. guest: the constitution's

opening clause requires the president to nominate, the senate to confirm any judge or other officer of the united states. this is advise and consent. it also has a provision in the constitution that allows for the president to put officials in positions, including judges, when the senate is in recess. for much of senate history, senators were not in town, and it took a long time to get to town. this was before you could hop on a plane and get to d.c. from anywhere in the country in a few hours. the idea was to ensure the functioning of the government. but when the senate returned, the senate within have to vote on that nominee, if the president wanted that person to continue in that job for a longer period of time. recess appointment nominees can only serve for a limited amount of time. host: one was a last time a recess appointment -- when was the last time a recess appointment was used? has ever been used for a cabinet level position?

guest: recess appointees have been used for pretty much every position. the president has used them on a routine basis. they are not controversial in and of themselves. however, they gained added controversy in this era of partisanship. -- when the senate was ostensibly not in recess, but he claimed they were a pair that went to the supreme court. there was a case which spoke to this issue and limited the power of the president to make recess appointments. host: this may be a tricky question, but who decides if a recess appointment can be used? guest: at the end of the day, no one is in charge. no one rules america. that is the point of america. ultimately, it is the people. the people will make the decision as to how their elected officials in the white house and congress act when they go back to the polls in the next

election. with regard to the powers of each branch, each branch gets to decide how it will execute its power, use its power under the constitution. the president can certainly decide, like president obama did, that he wants to make a recess appointment. but if the senate and house disagree, they have tools they can use, the power of the purse, even impeach. and the courts also have a role to play, as we saw in 2014. host: you were talking about the chambers having control over recess appointments. it was during former president trump, now present electron, his first term, that he threatened to adjourn congress to push through nominees using recess appointments. how does that work? guest: the constitution does give the president power to adjourn the house and senate on

extra ordinary occasions. that is the term it uses, "extraordinary occasions." when they can't agree, cases of disagreement between the two chambers on the time of the appointment. so the president has floated the idea may be the president could use that to forcibly adjourn congress and therefore create a recess, create the opportunity he could then use this power in the constitution to make recess appointments. if you actually look at it, it has never been done before. it would be an x ordinary power the president would use, something more akin to what the king had in great britain, when we declared independence, when the king dissolved polymers at will. that is not something the founding fathers were thrilled about. also, you have to be in a state of disagreement. that is a very precise term and it seems clear the senate can control when it wants to be in a state -- state of disagreement with the house and when it doesn't. host: we are talking with james

wallner, a senior resident, fellow at the archery institute, about the gop controlled senate and the upcoming congress, and also president-elect trump's potential recess nominations. if you have a question or comment for him, you can start calling in now. the line for democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicanss, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. james, you talked about both chambers. you mentioned both chambers, although appointments and nominations usually go through the senate. what is the house's role? what can they do when it comes to nominations? guest: your absolutely correct that the senate and only the senate has a role in that confirmation process. the house does not. however, if the president wants to make a recess appointment or if the president is to make a recess appointment, the senate has to be in recess.

the senate can control when it goes into recess, when it adjourns and does not adjourn. however, the constitution requires the senate to get the permission of the house if it wants to adjourn for more than three days. this will involve the house, whether the senate wants to or not or whether the president wants to or not. you have to have both chambers in agreement to adjourn for a sufficient period of time in order for the president to have the opportunity to make a recess appointment. host: for viewers who regularly watch "washington journal," you probably see us dip into a house pro forma every now and then. that is some of what james is talking about, in order to continue to keep chambers in session. james, the republicans won control of the chamber for the upcoming 119th congress. right now, they will have an expected 53 seats. there is one race in pennsylvania that is going into a recount, but they are expected

have 53 seats, two democrats and one independent for 47. what does that mean for wanting to gavel out and potential legislation? guest: the first thing your viewers need to understand is a simple majority can adjourn the senate. ever since we saw them use the nuclear option to get rid of the filibuster for executive branch nominations, a simple majority can confirm a nominee. this isn't a problem. there is no crisis if you are president-elect trump, if you have the support of all the republicans, because you have the votes right there. you can't filibuster these nominations. however, if you do not have the support of all these nominations, this will not happen, because you have to be in a state of disagreement for the president to use this extraordinary power on this, as the constitution says, x

ordinary occasion. it seems to me you cannot force the house into a state of disagreement, has to take action on its own, which itself takes a majority. in the meantime, we see this going back to president george w. bush and more, majorities will take these pro forma sessions, which will sound bizarre to those a home, where you come in, gavel in, there's no one else around, they say we are here, then they adjourn, and that is it. they do that every three days. as long as they keep doing that, that prevents the president for making a recess appointment, because the senate is not in a recess. host: our first caller for you, james in georgia, line for independents. caller: good morning. i was a progressive democrat, but i agree that trump should be able to put into place anybody he wants. the democrats are weak. they can interpret the constitution, trump can.

i'm sick of the democrats crying. we gave them obama and 60 votes. they could have done whatever they wanted. do not use the filibuster to stop you from passing legislation. the people who voted for trump -- they should live throughout whatever he wanted to do. all the democrats are complaining all the time and stuff about the constitution and this and that everything, but the constitution can be interpreted to mean anything any administration wants. democrats, shut up, especially you hispanics who voted for trump -- host: any response? guest: the first thing i would point out is we have been in this position before. we had unified republican-controlled government, donald trump in the white house making cabinet level appointments, and democrats were very much opposed to that. at that time, senator chris murphy -- versus february of 2017.

they went around the clock, one night, stayed in session all night long voting on cabinet level nominations. afterwards, senator chris murphy spoke to a process of group, and they asked him, they were like, this is exciting, we will take the fight to them. senator murphy looked at them and said i am exhausted, i do not know how watch -- how much longer we can sustain this pair that is important to remember. we have not seen all out obstruction with the filibuster, even without the filibuster, of presidential nominations because it takes effort and time. if you know you will lose in the end, that is hard to do. it is important we keep this context in mind. in reality, we have seen this before. the president typically gets his nominations. the only thing i would say is a lot of the people right now who are alarmed by this idea the president would use recess appointments in this way and are pushing back aggressively against the president were also the same people who argued aggressively that the president

ought to have -- ought to be able to put people in executive branch positions with george w. bush. if you look at george w. bush's judicial nominations, these very same people would say things like it is unconstitutional for the senate to not have a vote, and up or down vote on a presidential nomination. it is important to keep this history in mind. the moment we're in, maybe they changed their talking points, maybe people turned things around a little, but it is never totally unique in american history. host: to the caller's point, there is a reuters headline, expect to hear the f word a lot in the senate next year. f word is the filibuster. it is something republicans have said they want to keep in place. how could that impact president-elect trump's legislative efforts? guest: as we understand the

filibuster, it often means a veto. it means you need 60 votes, not 51, to get anything done. because were republicans do not have 60 votes, that means they would need to moderate their agenda in order to get things done. that is the conventional understanding of the filibuster. after having worked in the senate many years, watching senators tried to filibuster things, i can assure you the filibuster is not a veto. it does not seem like that until you are tasked for trying to filibuster something. the filibuster is an opportunity to speak, an opportunity to speak and be heard and participate in the debate, and you have to sustain that filibuster and that obstruction. that is very hard. for much of american history, there was no way to end the filibuster, and the senate still be -- did big things on narrow majority votes. we can still see lots of things pass even with the filibuster on legislation, because that is up to the republicans, not democrats. it is up to how they manage the

senate and how aggressively they push through their agenda. host: remind us what type of legislation 60 votes is not needed on. guest: in recent years, people have heard the term "budget reconciliation." budget reconciliation is a fancy term that refers to a bill that cannot be filibuster, that there is a time limit for its debate on the senate floor and the house floor. but the house floor can do whatever they want with the special rules. so this really only applies to the senate. the ideas when congress passes a budget and it has topline level for spending and revenue, later on, they can look at that budget, look at the permanent law, see how they are compared. and if we are spending more than the budget said we ought to come if we are not bringing in as much, bringing into little, as the budget said we ought to, then they can pass a bill to reconcile or align that permanent law with the budget. that is what the budget reconciliation measure does. it is ostensibly meant to focus

only on budget related items, not policy related items. but both parties have used budget reconciliation to do purely policy related stuff. host: richard in illinois, line for democrats. good morning. caller: i just had a basic question. due to the fact trump says he wants to put two czars up there for major cuts -- these are two billionaires -- where does the american people fit in, where if they disagree with what he is doing, that they can call and put in a complaint? because he is eliminating congress, too. i just want to know. that's my question, sir. guest: we have seen the executive office of the president and the executive staff grow significantly since its first real appearance with franklin delano roosevelt. presidents of both parties have used non-senate confirmed

positions and people to get advice and carry their agenda to capitol hill and out into the press. i can reassure you, unless congress gives the president this power, congress ultimately has the power of the purse. james madison called it the most effectual power any people can give to defend themselves against tyranny. it is the most important power. the congress has to approve any cuts. and i would go one step further. the constitution is explicit. no many can even leave the treasury -- no money can even leave the treasury unless the house first asks to prove that. if the house decides to do nothing, no money leaves. if the house decides to spend money, it goes to the senate, if they disagree, they vote on a bill, then they are in a state of disagreement, then they work that out, then that bill goes to the president. that may or may not be under the czar, but ultimately, the

people's representatives in the congress have to make that decision. host: another james for you, this one in new jersey, line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i have a question regarding these recess appointments. what would be the political cost -- i am not even sure what the correct term without b, recalling a trump nominee? for example, matt gaetz seems to be one of the more controversial choices for a very consequential position. hypothetically, matt gaetz is put in that role via recess appointment. what happens when the republican-controlled senate returns? is it even remotely possible, after president trump's resounding victory, that a republican-controlled senate would even consider something like that? it seems to me -- i am no expert by any means -- it seems like a huge political risk. some of them are up for reelection in 2026. to me, it seems they want to do

anything and everything to keep president trump and his supporters happy after a resounding landslide victory. guest: so the president can't nominate the presumptive attorney general nominee until he is sworn in office. once he is in office, that nomination can be made to her that goes to the senate. the senate judiciary committee will review it. after reviewing it and having a hearing, they vote on it, then it does to the full senate. at any point in that process, that nomination can be withdrawn by the president. we have seen this with former majority leader tom daschle. president obama avoided -- appointed daschle, and ultimately, because of a tax issue, that nomination was withdrawn. presidents can withdraw nominations anytime. defeating a cabinet level nominee in a vote will be rare, but what is much more likely to happen is that the senate will

lean on the president, tell the president, make it clear to the president that he does not have the votes, at which point the president with then presumably withdraw the nominee. of course, president-elect trump is unlike other presidents in many respects, so it is unclear whether that would be the case. host: a question coming in on x. he say, to your guest, explain the filibuster used by tommy tuberville used in promoting generals. guest: what senator tuberville did was not a filibuster. this is why we think the filibuster is the veto. again, the filibusters just the opportunity to stand and talk. as all of you know, standing up and talking takes a lot of effort. you get the lights on you and the cameras are rolling and there are other places you want to be and your colleagues are grumbling, maybe your spouse or kids back home are like, why are you not coming home? there are a lot of things that factor into make it hard to

sustain. what senator tuberville simply said was say no. the senate has rules, and it can follow those rules, and for much of its history, the rules led it to do great and big things. just like the house today, the senate does not follow its rules all the time. instead, it creates new rules. the mechanism used to do that is what is called a unanimous consent agreement. they say, i ask unanimous consent that we take these five nominations and put them together and just confirm care that is something you would do. when you ask for unanimous consent, you're asking for everyone's consent. this is a vote which requires 100 senators to vote yes. you are asking for senator tuberville's permission, at which point, senator tuberville's is completely justified to say no, because you are asking for his permission. if you do not want to senator tuberville to say no, do not ask for his permission, and just use the rules instead of asking for unanimous consent. host: david in new york, line for independents.

caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. my question is framed around matt gaetz and whether trump has the ability to install whoever he wants in that position. the way i'm looking at it is basically i am looking back a generation and what have -- looking back at january 6 and what happened on january 6, a terrible time for our country. on january 6, it was framed at the viewpoint that donald trump was trying to stop the certification of the votes. but i am looking at it from a different perspective. i am tried to figure out what was actually happening in the house when january 6 happened. what happened was ted cruz was standing there with two congressmen, ready to try to debate whether the election was fair or not. so i am looking at that as motive.

why would trump want to stop that? who would want to stop that? from my perspective, trump would not have wanted to stop that. when everything stopped and went back, they did not pick up with ted cruz. everyone, i guess, got scared and just said we are going to certify this election. so my point is, what really happens? do we need to investigate that? does trump have a duty to get someone in government that would actually look at people in our government who may have done something illegal that they, right? host: james? guest: well, what the members of congress were doing, apart from the people who broke into the capitol and ransacked the place, separate from all of that, what the members of congress were doing, whether we like that or

not, was they were using rules on the books, the electoral count act establishes procedures. they were using those procedures to adjudicate presidential electors. their motive, we can question their motives, we can question all kinds of things. but ultimately, they were using rules that congress, under the constitution, has the authority to make and set. when we talk about punching members for using the rules or punishing members for what we call legal acts that are sensibly just sanctioned by the rules, we get into a very slippery situation. ultimately, then it becomes any behavior we don't like, pursuant to the rules, is somehow going to be damaging to the constitution, and we ought not to do it. what i would encourage everyone to do, in thinking about january 6, is separate the institutional processes playing out inside and the stuff happening outside. i don't think the institutional

processes because what happened on the outside. maybe they were both manifestations of the same thing, but rulebound behavior, in and of itself, in my opinion, is not illegal. that is an important thing to remember. host: kyle in hawaii, line for independents. good morning. caller: aloha, c-span, thanks for doing this program. what still requires a two thirds vote? i'll listen off the. guest: so the filibuster essentially says you need 3/5 of all senators -- if you have 100 senators in office, that is 60. you need 60 senators a vote to end debate if a senator or senators don't want to end debate and go to a final vote. since the nuclear option, that does not apply to nominations

anymore. it still applies to legislation. the legislative realm, there are some things like budget reconciliation measures and the past trade approval measures, there are things that don't require 60 that we call fast track. they have time limits on their debate. then we get to the 2/3 level, any efforts on a filibuster to change the senate rules requires two thirds of senators present and voting. if you'll have all 100 senators on the floor, it will take 60 senators in order to change the senate's rules. you also you also need 2/3 to confirm treaties or impeach a president. host: james wallner talking about the gop winning control of the senate chamber for next term. the house, also, republicans

were able to hang onto it. it is likely they will also have a slim majority. what does that mean when it comes to legislative effort? when was the last time a party had a trifecta? guest: the republican party had a trifecta in 2017. we have been here before. very narrow control in the house and senate with president trump in the white house. this was after seven years of the party signing blood oath's they would repeal obama care. they walked away and did not so much as mention it again. the minority leader on the floor , the majority leader after that said if there is anything republicans agree on, it is tax reform. we all love tax reform. they barely passed tax reform. that was only after senators

came in and led an effort to the finance committee to jumpstart the process. if you do not like the republican agenda and you do not like president-elect trump's agenda, a lot of the concerns you have are fully justified but i think it is not likely based on past history that republicans will be able to steamroll and pass what they want. if you are a big fan of that agenda, if you want to make america great again, i think a lot of the excitement and expectation may lead to disappointment. in reality, republicans do not all agree on the agenda. they just do not do that. immigration is a great example. the same with the democrats. i think what we will see over the next seven or eight months is the reality of our partisan divisions within the party coming to the forefront and it will change our expectations we have right now. host: you mentioned senator mitch mcconnell. he has stepped down from his

leadership role of the party after 18 years. this week, the senate republicans elected john thune of south dakota as their new leader. what do we know about his relationship with president-elect trump? guest: senator thune, like most senate republicans, has a relationship with president-elect trump. he has been making efforts to get closer with president-elect trump. even when he was president before, he comes from a state where the president is popular. any senator will have a relationship with the president, especially a president of your own party. when that senate leader is seen as just doing the job as opposed to facilitating for their own party. alvin barclay was another majority leader from kentucky and his president was franklin delano roosevelt. he was criticized for being too

close to f.d.r. at one point, he resigned his seat as leader. they reelected him unanimously the next day. there is a give and take here. when we say the president's agenda, we are talking about an agenda the voters of the senator s want to pass. they are doing things their voters want them to do. when their voters decide they do not want that to happen or they say that is a bridge too far for me, they will expect their leader to work for them and not the president. host: audrey in west babylon, new york, on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: if the senators refused to do the recess, will their states be impacted? host: will their states be impacted, james? guest: the impact would be if

they refuse to help president trump, if they vote against his nomination's or speak out aggressively against the president and his effort to make a recess appointment. that would play out as soon as two years from now when they are up for reelection. in the near term, it is not likely it will have an impact on anyone particular state. host: catherine in maine on the line for independents. good morning,. caller: good morning. i would like to ask, can there be more than one president at a time? biden is currently president. therefore, how can trump who has not been inaugurated yet do recess appointments? guest: the president elect actually nominate anybody and be

sworn into office until he takes the office in january of next year. we only have one president. at the constitutional convention in 1787, he wanted three presidents. the idea we have one president is something the framers believed in strongly because the president is meant to have unity in the executive so it can manage the executive branch, hierarchical organization, that ultimately represents the nation abroad. we only have one president at a time. the president may be eclipsed by their successor, like in this case, people are talking about trump and what is to come as opposed to biden and what we have right now. we still have from a legal perspective only one president. if we did not, edmund randolph would be very happy. he called having one president

the elitist of monarchies. he ultimately lost. host: rick in idaho, line for democrats, good morning. caller: how you doing? i want to know if somebody is appointed or confirmed, what mechanism can the senate used to get them out of there if they do not like them, if he is messing up or whatever? guest: the constitution gives the congress the power to impeach. it gives the house the power to impeach. impeachment is like an indictment. we are going to charge you with this crime. the house will pass the resolution of impeachment. it goes to the senate. the senate would have a trial and ultimately decide. senators are the judge and jury. they would decide whether to convict. if they convict, that official is removed from office. that is not the only power they have. that is the power of the purse. you can cut off salaries.

you can limit the way funding is used. you can use your power of the purse and your power to pass laws to insulate that person so they cannot cause a lot of trouble, and try to make their lives miserable so they can ultimately leave. the president can veto anything. but then congress has the ability to override that veto. lastly, they have the ability to connect oversight. that is not nothing. . you have hearings. those hearings are opportunities for the media to cover something. you can draw attention to stuff and let the american people know what is happening. it is a very important tool to use in between elections because it shines a light on what the government is doing. the people can make it very clear to their elected officials what they expect them to do moving forward. if they do not comply, they are not going to go back to d.c. after the next election. host: ralph in washington, d.c., line for independents. good morning. caller: harvard did a study and

said they only vote for them 30% of the time. people say how can you not be a democrat or republican, i think both parties are full of crap. 90 leave congress rich -- 95% leave congress rich. how can you leave congress with a million dollars in your pocket and not be corrupt? we have a media, for example, we have a media bought by the drug companies. then we have a vaccine that was funded by pyeongchang -- fauci, a virus funded by fauci. they have a rule that you cannot leave the house unless you get a vaccine shot because the

politicians are bought and the media is bought. fighting has pfizer has made $100 million off the vaccine. the death rate is even higher. i do not trust any of these guys anymore. guest: i can assure you i did not leave congress with millions of dollars in my pocket. there will be bad apples. there will be things that happen. i cannot explain everything in our system. it is by no means perfect. i also believe deeply our system of government, while not perfect, and it has gotten better over time, all the things we have done in our history, those things have happened not in spite of our constitution but because of it and through it. one of the big tragedies we see with a lot of the frustration right now, genuine frustration, frustration i understand with the government on both sides

without has up -- with how it has operated, that frustration when it is turned on the system itself, that is the danger. the way you rein in an executive that you do not like, that you stop a president, that you replace congress, the way you do that is through the system, not in spite of the system. the american people have all the tools they need to get the government they want but we have to see the system as the place where we go to adjudicate our disagreements and govern ourselves. after all, we are a self-government. that means we have to govern ourselves. we need a place to do that. for better or worse, that is congress. that is where we go to negotiate the nonnegotiable's. host: mark in new york, line for democrats. caller: i'm interested in what

he has to say about presidential immunity. i'm sure that must extend to biden as well. with all of trump's threats about martial law and bo crept, i am assuming biden would be able to do the same thing. guest: the supreme court declared the president in an official act is immune. this is one we will continue to see the consequences of. we have to see what happens. when we think about these types of questions, we are trained almost today to think of them in terms of the law, as a legal process with a legal decision and outcome. that is good because it is certain. when we think about presidents abusing their power, when we think about congress abusing

their power like with the alien sedition act, when we think about the branches of the government abusing their power under the constitution that they have, i think we need to think of it in terms of political, fundamental type law where the people are tasked with protecting their own liberty by replacing that government. let's say the president is not doing something, congress needs to step up to rein in the president. that is the notion of the separation of powers. instead, today, we handed over to a legal process in judges because we expect that is what it will take to make sure president do not abuse their power. i can assure you if you have a popular and aggressive executive, and this has been the case throughout human history, judges are not going to be able to stop the executive. they will not be able to stop napoleon.

the only thing that stops executives like that, the only thing that stops pirates, are the people themselves. it is up to them acting through the political branches established through the constitution to preserve the constitution and separation of powers upon which it depends. host: liz, connecticut, on the line for democrats. caller: a couple of callers asked how president trump could put nominations forward if he is not the president and if the senate and house are on recess. he did not answer the question. he told the history of how there is only one president, but he did not answer the question. president-elect trump cannot make a recess appointment until he is the president. the president-elect will not be the president until the end of january next year. host: for a point of

clarification, when we are talking about the nomination this week, it is who president-elect trump is planning to nominate when he is sworn in january 20. he is just getting a head start. james, we appreciate your time. our guest, james wallner, is a senior announcer: coming up next, a hearing on government research into unidentified anomalous phenomenon, and then the commissioner of the fda and cdc join other health care officials to talk about equity and increasing patient access to new technologies. later president-elect trump mes with president biden in the oval office. president biden is traveling to

president biden is traveling to the amazon rain forest to talk about preservation efforts there. you can watch on c-span, c-span now our free mobile app and online at c-span.org. >> president elect donald has selected a fossil fuel executive to serve in his administration. his -- he is a vocal advocate of fracking. the council of energy is set to be led by interior secretary nominee doug burgum. the president-elect said in a statement, his appointment will be subject to senate confirmation. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including comcast. >> you think this is just a community center? it's way more than that.