this is a live shot, looks like the beginnings of a funnel cloud coming at the bottom of that cloud. tough to tell. certainly ominous. melissa: you hope everyone stays safe. we will definitely be thinking of them. connell: thanks for joining us today and every day. melissa: "bulls & bears" starts now. president trump set to make his very first visit of 2019 to the crucial battleground state of pennsylvania for a rally in just a couple of hours from now. the president is facing some challenges in the keystone state. the latest pennsylvania poll showing former vice president joe biden leading the president by double digits there. as pennsylvania state leaders now warn that tariff tussle with china is hitting home. this is "bulls & bears." i'm kristina partsinevelos. joining me on the fabulous panel, because it's usually a fun monday, liz peek, jonathan hoenig, gary kaltbaum and marc loert. le let's go straight to brian

yennis who is in pennsylvania. i normally see you in the building. great to see you out there. you are at the president's rally tonight. we know the president won pennsylvania by just about 1% in 2016. what are you expecting this evening? from him? reporter: good evening. look, look, there's no coincidence that the last three visits and the last three rallies the president has had have been in michigan, wisconsin and now pennsylvania. these are the three states that carried president trump to the white house in 2016 and he won those states by less than one percentage point. really crucial that he's here today in pennsylvania. the president won by less than 1% and was the first republican candidate to do that since 1988. tonight, the president is speaking here with the backdrop of an ongoing trade war with china. expect him to defend tariffs, tariffs which republican pe pennsylvania senator and trump supporter pat toomey says are crippling manufacturing and farming jobs but also hurting

consumers. republicans in this state are a big concern. take a look at this poll. the latest quinnipiac poll shows the democratic frontrunner and former vice president joe biden has an 11-point lead over president trump, 53-42%. he is the only democratic contender with a double digit lead over president trump in the keystone state. tonight's rally is being held in former vice president joe biden's backyard. the rally is in montoursville, a solidly republican area 65 miles west of scranton, pennsylvania, where joe biden was born. his hometown. if the president's twitter is any indication, as it often is, we should be hearing president trump talk about biden a lot tonight. the president tweeting today quote, looks like bernie sanders is history. sleepy joe biden is pulling ahead and think about it, i'm only here because of sleepy joe and the man who took him off the 1% trash heap, president o. president obama. china wants sleepy joe badly. we should also expect the

president today to talk, to continue to tout a strong economy. the unemployment rate here in pennsylvania is at a record low of 3.8%. that's the lowest since 1976. 115,000 jobs have been added in the trump presidency so look for the president to continue to talk about why they should again re-elect him because of those strong economic numbers. also, an interesting thing happened over the weekend. joe biden touting the economy himself, saying that the strong economy is a result of his administration, not trump's. >> i know president trump likes to take credit for the economy and the economic growth, the low unemployment numbers but just look at the facts, not the alternative facts. president trump inherited an economy from obama/biden administration. that was given to him, just like he inherited everything else in his life.

reporter: joe biden clearly thinks he can win back the middle class, working class vote and that's why he's here strong in pennsylvania, his headquarters are in philadelphia. kristina? kristina: at least they agree on one thing. we know the economy is doing well. enjoy the show. i can hear the music quite loud. thank you so much. reporter: of course. kristina: okay. so another thing that's working against the president right now, roll call reporting that pennsylvania farmers, manufacturers and consumers are getting hit by the china trade battle. but could this cost president trump his re-election? gary, i am going to direct this question at you. we know farmers have been relatively supportive thus far despite them taking major hits. how much financial pain do you actually think they can continue to take? >> well, why do you think the president is now subsidizing farmers when he's putting on tariffs that are hurting farmers? you know, the president's really taunting the economy that's done very well off of him and i must

tell you that he had better be very, very careful. if you look at pennsylvania he won on 54,000 votes, that's 20 electoral votes. if he loses pennsylvania, michigan, he only won by 11,000 votes, that's 16 electoral votes. that's 36. that puts him at 268. that means he would have lost to hillary clinton. he better start recognizing regardless what he tells you, that tariffs are wonderful, they are the exact opposite. they are the worst possible thing he can do. it is a tax on the consumer and business and it is bad news. >> indeed, and it will push us, gary, into recession. look, you don't have to be a huge economic scholar, just look back to george bush's first administration in 2002. his steel tariffs cost about 200,000 jobs. that's more jobs than were employed in the steel sector at the time. there is no such thing as a free lunch. tariffs are taxes on americans. everyone from farmers as he pointed out to auto makers to consumers, even to shoe makers,

apparel makers now, an open letter to president trump saying look, this is bothering our bottom line, yet this trade war is supposedly easy to win, is now going on upwards of a year in a very expensive manner to the average american. >> look, this is simple. american presidents of both parties have been talking tough with china for decades and doing nothing about it. this is the first president who is actually confronting the problem, confronting the challenge, and i think the american workers who have been lied to for decades realize it. they know that china has been stealing their jobs. they have been ripping us off. one of the reasons why president trump remains so strong from that same quinnipiac poll from today, 54% of people in pennsylvania said they are better off now than they were four years ago, and a record 71% said that the economy in pennsylvania is excellent or good. that blew away the previous record by 25 percentage points. it's a difficult discussion, it's a difficult thing to do, but this president, we've got a

strong economy, wages growing faster than inflation -- >> marc, marc -- >> can i break in? just to point out, i just want to remind everyone it's very early to be taking these polls terribly seriously. biden has not really run into any confrontation either with his fellow democrats who are running, which he will in the debates, or with president trump. let's remember, over the weekend, australia had an election that blew away every pundit in the world who expected the existing president to be bounced. he was not, even though all the polls showed the opposition labor party with a very comfortable lead. i just caution against taking these polls terribly seriously. kristina: to that point, i'm surprised that none of you on the panel have talked about the government handouts that have happened thus far. in 2018, $8.5 billion in direct payments, the fact that the president has moved forward and said he's going to give out another handout, literally -- >> to farmers. kristina: to farmers.

so taxpayers are paying for this tariff war. marc, i know you just voice the strength and how pennsylvania really supports him and you talked about all these polls but why are we paying for this? >> because it's important to make this change. it's important to confront china. marc is totally right, it's been decades that china has been eating our lunch. kristina: hold on -- >> no, this is true. and stealing our intellectual property. >> liz, explain to me once again why taxing americans, look, goldman sachs said this is going to cost 6% of corporate profits. tens and tens of thousands of dollars walk. >> how do you confront china without making it more difficult for them to export? >> go after, liz, go after those who steal intellectual property. go after the bank accounts, go after the corporations. >> they have done that. >> you're taxing americans.

>> we have been told now for the better part of a year that tariffs are just a tactic. it is to negotiate with the chinese to get them to move our way. well, the tactic is not working. in fact, it is penalizing, it is hurting. there's a reason why as i said earlier that the president is subsidizing farmers. by the way, there's a reason why the president put away the european union auto tariffs for six months, because he knows how much they would hurt and i got to tell you, if they were to put those auto tariffs on, gdp would have been dumped. all we have been saying is whatever they have been trying has not worked. [ speaking simultaneously ] >> we have been hearing these doom and dire forecasts from the so-called experts since the day president trump was elected. our economy keeps growing, despite all of their dire predictions. gdp is growing. inflation is under control. all of these things lead to a

position of strength for the president to negotiate with china to deal with these companies that are stealing intellectual property. who are using that -- >> but marc, those who are feeling the effects, consumers who are feeling the effects of higher prices, ford and general motors, who paid billions and billions of dollars in excess costs for steel, are they just making it up? >> steel and -- the steel in auto tariffs came off of mexico and china or sorry, mexico and canada and they will work with us about canadian steel dumping. by the way, the things you are now touting put out -- they eliminated our steel and aluminum industries. they are coming back because the president stands up for workers. >> they are coming back? honestly, i don't know what you're looking at. the price of u.s. steel stock is up 50% in just the last year. >> inflation has not been an issue as we know for the last 18 months. there is no inflation. the newest tariff increases on

china may indeed follow through into price increases for consumers in america. there hasn't been much of that. gary, i would just say to you, the chinese have made any number of concessions in response to the tariffs. they don't want a trade war. it is more important to them than it is to us. i think we are eventually going to win this thing but if every time there's a snag, everybody runs for the hills and the country doesn't stand behind the president, no, we are not going to. kristina: i'm going to leave it there just because of timing but i like the fact we are not all agreeing on this. >> that's good. kristina: i disagree with you, though, because i do think there will be long-term pain and we are underestimating the strength of china but let's move on, because this can continue all night. mayor pete calling for higher taxes on the wealthy while slamming trump's tax cuts. could his ideas gain steam? you know it. we will debate it next. >> we really do need to entertain ideas like i would say a fairer, which means higher, marginal income tax rate on those earning the most. all money managers might seem the same,

but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management. (vo) ♪ i know what you're thinking. electric, it's not for you. and, you're probably right. electric just doesn't have enough range. it will never survive the winter. charging stations? good luck finding one of those. so, maybe an electric car isn't for you after all. or, is it? ♪

for people 50 and older colat average risk.ing honey have you seen my glasses? i've always had a knack for finding things... colon cancer, to be exact. and i find it noninvasively... no need for time off or special prep. it all starts here... you collect your sample, and cologuard uses the dna in your stool to find 92% of colon cancers. you can always count on me to know where to look. oh, i found them! i can do this test now! ask your doctor if cologuard is right for you. covered by medicare and most major insurers.

kristina: democratic 2020 presidential candidate pete buttigieg slamming president trump's tax cuts at a fox news town hall with chris wallace while laying out plans for four more tax hikes. >> you don't blow a hole in the

budget with an unnecessary and unaffordable tax cut for the very wealthiest. we really do need to entertain ideas like i would say a fairer which means higher marginal income tax rate on those earning the most, a reasonable wealth tax or something like that to make sure that people are giving back when they become enormously we wealthy, perhaps a financial transactions tax that taxes millisecond transfers on computer trade, and closing loopholes and incentives for offshoring. kristina: jonathan, i will direct this at you. i kind of know how you feel about this. there seems to be a reoccurring theme among democrats to tax the wealthy. you may not agree with it but they wouldn't keep bringing it up if it wasn't doing well in the polls. do you think this is starting to resonate with voters? >> oh, sure. oh, sure. tax the wealthy, tax the wealthy. it's working very well for democrats, but it's also working pretty well for republicans as

well. a fox poll queried republicans, 54% said they are for raising taxes on people with incomes over $10 million. this is just complete upside down perspective on wealthy people. if you see a billionaire, you should be thanking them. kristina: let's put up the statue and kiss the feet, right? >> exactly. kristina: hopefully good luck will happen? >> not good luck, but unlike pete buttigieg, our government, billionaires have created value that have improved all of our lives. kristina: marc? >> i will tell you, one of the things mayor pete is doing is lying to the american people again, when he talks about the tax cuts from president trump being just for the wealthy, when 82% of americans got a tax cut and the taxes went down for people at the lower end of the spectrum more than they did for the people at the top. but look, i'm from indiana originally. let's deal with some reality. this is a man who wants to be president of the united states. a recent poll that was run by

his hometown paper says 65% of the people of south bend think their streets and services are worse now under mayor pete and nearly two-thirds think their city's unsafe. if you can't fill potholes and keep your own little small city safe, how on earth do you think you are qualified to be president of the united states. >> he's probably doing better than bill de blasio on that front. it is a bigger landscape, for sure. i think the disappointing thing about buttigieg and his comments he made in the town hall is that there's nothing very original. he's basically parroting the kinds of tax proposals that other people have rolled out, like elizabeth warren and bernie sanders. it's all about redistribution of income. i would love to hear one democrat say how about we cut spending. how about we reorganize the federal government or reorganize some of our policies to make it more productive. we are spending hundreds of billions of dollars every year on so many programs that are never assessed that are supposed to be helping the poor, yet the

income inequality divide gets worse and worse. how about looking at some of those things and coming up with something clever. >> i don't care if he's 37 or 87 or the night king from "game of thrones." it seems to be the same old, same old from these people. i was furiously writing down a couple things as we came into this segment. he says unaffordable tax cut. hey, pal, it's our money in the first place. we are giving it to you. the problem is you guys are spending federal, state and local over $6 trillion out of the economy. he goes on to say a reasonable wealth tax. reasonable wealth tax. are you kidding me? excuse me. the people that are creating all the jobs and producing all the jobs and all the wealth in this country, let's reasonably how about leave them alone. he finishes up with perhaps a transaction tax, financial transaction tax. how about perhaps maybe polling over 5% so we can consider you going forward.

it's another one that's going to go into the dust bin of tax hikes. kristina: how about if i rephrase it and we talk about the loopholes that were enacted recently like the like kind exchange, the fact you can take a commercial property, sell it, put it into, all that money into another property within six months. boom, you don't get taxed on that. there's a lot of loopholes, new ones that came about, than could contribute to the argument that the wealthy, those that own all this property, can hide and put their money away. how about if i phrase that question maybe to marc, to you. >> i think there are a number of loopholes they are talking about closing. there are loopholes they want to close. but i also think we've got to make sure that using the example that you just provided, that a corporation who is building property, say, in real estate, when they sell that property, that they can have a period of time before they reinvest that money and then start creating construction jobs and investments again. we've got to make sure we are doing things that don't provide disincentives for investing in our economy and creating jobs.

kristina: we will leave it there. tensions are rising between iran and the united states as president trump sends a very strong message to the iranians. we have congressman steve watkins who will tell us more about what needs to be done right now. stay tuned. ♪ limu emu & doug what do all these people have in common, limu? [ paper rustling ] exactly, nothing. they're completely different people, that's why they need customized car insurance from liberty mutual. they'll only pay for what they need! [ gargling ] [ coins hitting the desk ] yes, and they could save a ton. you've done it again, limu. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

lexus ux and ux f sport. also available in hybrid all-wheel-drive. lease the 2019 ux 200 for $329 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase.

kristina: tension escalating between the united states and iran with reports that rockets were fired into baghdad's green zone located just less than a mile from the u.s. embassy, yet president trump tweeting if iran wants to fight that will be the official end of iran, never threaten the united states again. we've got to get kansas congressman steve watkins, who serves on the house foreign affairs committee and is also an army veteran, congressman, thank you for joining us this evening. really do appreciate it. >> thank you. thanks for having me back. kristina: do you think, first

off, i'm just concerned about the timing. why do you think the president put this tweet out over the weekend? what prompted him? is it just to outline the u.s.'s red line? why did he put that out right now, this tough talk? >> listen, the iranian regime employs terrorism as its main tool of statecraft and we are used to that. they sponsor terrorism to the tune of $1 billion a year. we are used to that but what they're not used to is a president that pushes back instead of giving them pallets of cash. >> congressman, this is marc lotter. one of the things that's worried me, we had many republicans and a handful of democrats come out who have seen the intelligence and recognized the need for the president's strong response but others are trying to call question into that and when you are dealing with classified information as you know, you're not at liberty to discuss it. i think that just causes dissension. do you think anything, even like an international crisis, or tension, could actually bring congress together behind this

president to show strength? >> absolutely. that's possible. to those who would respond differently, they haven't had the same experience as i have. i have spent almost nine years on the ground dealing with middle eastern strongmen. when they push, you got to push back. >> congressman, it's liz peek. thank you for joining us. to kristina's question, it does seem like over the last week, let's say, there have been a number of provocative actions taken by iran, including most recently intelligence that they have been quadrupling their production of enriched uranium. it does seem like they are trying to provoke the president. the question i guess was have you seen any intelligence about dissent in the country of iran? i've got to think that the cutback on iranian oil exports, the economic hardship they are enduring right now might lead to some dissension. is that anything you have heard anything about? >> well, i'm not at liberty to discuss the secret or top secret information that we hear about, but you know, they are the leading sponsor of terrorism to

include hezbollah, islamic jihad, the houthis, who have sabotaged saudi oil rigs and oil processing facilities, so this response is not just our american president but also the saudi president salman has called an emergency summit of arab leaders to try and prevent these efforts to destabilize the region. >> thank you for being with us. thank you especially for your service to this country. you have just said it. iran is the number one state sponsor of terrorism all throughout the world and government is a gun. this is what they're for. guns don't belong in the boardroom or the bedroom or hospitals or schools. they belong fighting america's enemies. do you or should i say would you support something not dissimilar to what ronald reagan did in 1986, a preemptive strike against libya? would you support that type of maneuver against iran to really clearly send a message, america is not to be threatened? >> listen, i don't want to talk

about preeminent attacks. i trust in the wisdom, experience and confidence of secretary pompeo, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff dunford and the acting sec-def shanahan. i hope for peace. hope for the best. >> this is gary kaltbaum. i will ask the opposite question. before it gets real hairy, what kind of an off-ramp in secret talks with iran do we give them at this point in time so we can lower the temperature before this really does get out of hand? >> you are absolutely right. we do need to lower the temperature. to do so, we have postured well. we floated obviously the "uss abraham lincoln" carrier strike group into the region. the ball is in their court. we want peace and are hoping they do, too. kristina: i can't help but make a comparison with north korea and this kind of tough talk we saw with north korea and i think we can rightly say that we haven't really seen any positive outcome -- well, i guess the outcome that we were hoping for.

so why is the president channeling that, too, and does he really think iran is going to react the same way as north korea? >> compare president trump's approach with president obama, who gave him some $150 billion to include a few of those in cash. listen, again, i know middle eastern strongmen, i know how to deal with them. i have dealt with them almost my entire professional career in iraq and afghanistan and when they push, they have to get a push back. >> if you were in charge, what would you be doing? >> doing just what our president is doing. i would make it crystal clear that we are not going to put up with these heightened tensions and if they were responsible for the missile strike that came close to our embassy in baghdad, then that is absolutely unacceptable. i have been in the green zone. i have been under attack and in duck and cover bunkers when rockets are raining down and as a prior tactical operator, i'm very pleased with our president's decisions.

kristina: congressman, thank you so much for your service and for joining us. i'm hoping you will be back, right? >> hope so. thanks. kristina: thank you. kamala harris is ramping up her 2020 campaign by taking on the pay gap between men and women in america. our panel definitely going to sound off, next. stay close to your computers and tvs. ...or trips to mars. $4.95. delivery drones or the latest phones. $4.95. no matter what you trade, at fidelity it's just $4.95 per online u.s. equity trade.

no matter what you trade, at fidelity the doctor's office might mejust for a shot.o but why go back there when you can stay home with neulasta® onpro? strong chemo can put you at risk of serious infection. in a key study neulasta® reduced the risk of infection from 17% to 1% a 94% decrease. neulasta® onpro is designed to deliver neulasta® the day after chemo and is used by most patients today. neulasta® is for certain cancer patients receiving strong chemotherapy. do not take neulasta® if you're allergic to it or neupogen (filgrastim). an incomplete dose could increase infection risk. ruptured spleen, sometimes fatal as well as serious lung problems allergic reactions, kidney injuries and capillary leak syndrome have occurred. report abdominal or shoulder tip pain, trouble breathing or allergic reactions to your doctor right away. in patients with sickle cell disorders, serious, sometimes fatal crises can occur. the most common side effect is bone and muscle ache. if you'd rather be home

ask your doctor about neulasta® onpro. pay no more than $5 per dose with copay card.

dad, it's fine. we have allstate. and with claimrateguard they won't raise your rates just because of a claim. that's why you're my favorite... i know. are you in good hands? when you lift up the economic status of women, you lift up the economic status of families and communities and all of society. but yet in america today, women for the same work, for the equal work on average make 80 cents on the dollar. kristina: 2020 hopeful senator kamala harris taking aim at the pay gap between men and women at

major american companies. she's making it a focal point of her campaign. now releasing a plan to combat the issue by fining corporations 1% of their profits for every 1% in the wage gap between workers of equal value. she says that this could generate roughly $180 billion over the next ten years and liz, i'm going to go to you first. i want to know do you believe that this is the right way to tackle this issue, if you even think it's an issue. >> a, i think the issue is way overblown but b, this is not the way to tackle it. she wants to impose a giant new compliance regimen on corporations imposing all kinds of costs and regulatory red tape on companies which we're trying to remove red tape from the economy so it begins to grow faster. there is already a law in the land that equal pay must attach to equal work. women can sue, they can bring these charges forward. i don't know a major corporation

that is not concerned about this and very vigilant in trying to reduce what is supposed to be a pay gap. the pay gap results from all kinds of things in women's lives including taking a time-out to have children or to, you know, care for an aged parent, et cetera. it's a very complicated issue. this is not the way to go about fixing it. >> what nerve, what unbelievable nerve. i mean, dictator might be too strong with these leftists who want to come in and force, i mean, again, a tax, a fine, that's force, that's a gun pointed at private companies, force them to do business how they want to do it, pay their employees how much these people want to -- it's easy to pay employees higher wages when it's not your money. we talk about a free country, it means free from government and i just think it's a tremendous insult. this is essentially affirmative action for women. what an insult to women to say oh, we're going to force employers to give you a higher wage instead of earning it on your own. kristina: if you were making

$100,000 or $200,000 less than a female counterpart, would you be angry if you were doing the exact same thing and had the exact same education? >> i was doing the same thing, i would be making the same amount. i would be making it. kristina: that is often not the case. >> we the people continues to shrink every time i watch these democratic candidates. just go and listen to their speeches. it's another fee, another fine, another rule, another mandate, another regulation, another tax. it never ends. they want to run everything in our life and if they deem it unfair, they are going to fine you and take money away from you. they don't generate the money from you. they confiscate the money. i wish they would just stop and remember those three words, we the people. that's the greatness of the country, not we the government. >> contrast this with what ivanka trump is doing, using her platform inside the white house

to work with companies to address inequality issues, to help raise the training, the education, the opportunities for women, for minorities across the country, and actually around the globe. this is an opportunity to work together, not come down from the top down and as the government to the earlier points, to tax at the point of a gun to say you shall do this or we shall take your money from you, and spend it better on your behalf. it's just such an interesting case to show how the trump administration is using this and how kamala harris is doing it. kristina: i think actually the entire panel kind of agrees with this, that enforcing regulation is not necessarily a good thing but to the point, if we want to know what's going on, should there be full transparency so at least we know that a man is not making more than a woman with the same quality education, et cetera? >> i think those companies provide a great deal of transparency today. again, you have to remember if

you compare two people, a lot of it has to do with longevity, has to do with how many years, in other words, a person has been in a company. if you look at the actual data, i really just don't -- i really disagree with kamala harris that this is a big issue and i definitely disagree with the 20 cent difference. that is more than people were talking about several years ago. i cannot imagine with all the laws out there that it's actually gotten worse. kristina: jonathan, go ahead. i know you want to say something quickly. >> very briefly, even if men do make more than women, and i mean, i don't know, you can somehow run the statistics either way, it's simply not the role of government to micromanage the economy, to micromanage those changes. actually, i think it does a real disservice to people to get a higher wage because they are the skin color or gender. you have to earn that value for it to really mean something. again, i just think it's an insult to any woman to say i'm going to give you a wage because you are a better employee or worked harder. because you have a uterus.

that's terrible. kristina: i agree with you, and i'm going to leave it at that for this segment. president trump gearing up for a big meeting on wednesday with democratic leaders nancy pelosi and chuck schumer on infrastructure. but will they ever, ever agree on how to pay for their $2 trillion plan? the president, though, says he's already -- he already feels like he's being played by the democrats on this. democratic congressman john garamendi is here to respond and give us a preview of what to expect this wednesday. i'm working to make each day a little sweeter. ♪ to give every idea the perfect soundtrack. ♪ to make each journey more elegant. at adp we're designing a better way to work, so you can achieve what you're working for.

you can earn $100 off your deductiblee, for every year of safe driving? sing that. ♪ vanishing deductible, you can... ♪ ♪ earn $100... ♪ earn $100 off... ♪ off your deductible. ♪ deductible. ♪ for every year of safe driving. ♪ ♪ for every-- for every-- ♪ ♪ for every year of safe driving. ♪ what are you-- what key are you in? "e." no, no, go to "g." "g" will be too high.

not for me. ♪ vanishing deductible. oh, gosh. sweet, sweet. at comcast, we didn't build the nation's largest gig-speed network just to make businesses run faster. we built it to help them go beyond. because beyond risk... welcome to the neighborhood, guys. there is reward. ♪ ♪ beyond work and life... who else could he be? there is the moment. beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. ♪ ♪ every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected, to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.

kristina: president trump is gearing up for a meeting with house speaker nancy pelosi and senate minority leader chuck schumer on infrastructure and it's going to be happening this wednesday. both sides are actually agreeing on a $2 trillion plan but that's not stopping president trump from saying he feels played. here's the president speaking with fox news' steve hilton. >> you've got nancy pelosi, chuck schumer, we're going to get together and do a big infrastructure plan. very soon after that you had mick mulvaney saying it's not going to happen. do you still want that plan? >> if mick mulvaney said that, he has no right to say that. he tells me he didn't say that and he didn't mean it. he said it's going to be hard to finance. you know, we put $7 trillion -- >> you still want that big infrastructure?

>> i do, but i also think we are being played by the democrats a little bit. i think what they want me to do is what we will do is raise taxes and do this and this and this, then they'll have a news conference, see, trump wants to raise taxes. it's a little bit of a game. kristina: democrat congressman john garamendi sits on the house transportation and infrastructure committee and joins us now live on capitol hill. what do you think of this dialogue? do you think that your constituents in the democratic party are playing the president? >> no, not at all. what i think is this is not a very good start for negotiations. $2 trillion, that is a great terrific goal and god knows america needs that kind of infrastructure. i think americans know they need to rebuild our infrastructure to build for the future. $2 trillion, that's a good number. we have to find the money to pay for it. >> congressman, this is gary kaltbaum. thanks for being with us. let's assume something does get done even though i'm not sure the odds are that good.

who is going to be the oversight to make sure that money goes into some kind of lockbox and doesn't go into so many other programs like it has in the past? >> well, for the most part, transportation money is used for transportation. the gasoline tax, diesel tax, that goes into a trust fund and is only used there. the problem is, the amount of money that we need just for transportation, highways, public transportation and the like, is less than is raised with those excise taxes. therefore, general fund money has gone in to supplement those highway programs. in addition to that, there's one other source of money that's supposed to be in a trust fund and that's the harbor maintenance fund, a tax on every container that comes into our harbors. unfortunately, about 70% of that money is indeed ripped off for other purposes. that's a couple of billion dollars a year that should be used again for our harbors to maintain our ports. so the bottom line here is if we are able to raise money, it will

go into trust funds to be used for infrastructure. many different kinds, you can talk about everything from broadband to sanitation to water systems and other kinds of transportation, airports and the like. >> congressman, as you know, so few bipartisan things are happening right now on capitol hill. one of the great success stories was the first step act. most of that was done behind the scenes before it came out to be public. are you convinced that either side right now, again, politics is going to come into play, the president alluded to it, it's too easy for both sides if you're negotiating in front of the cameras. >> well, the real issue comes down to how are we going to raise the money. we certainly know where it needs to be spent. we know the kind of programs that should be funded. many of those have been around for decades. they need to be updated in some cases. but it's really about the money. frankly, the only way we are ever going to raise the revenue to actually do these programs is for the democrats and republicans and the president to

all hold hands and say we are doing this together. anything short of that and there will be a lot of finger pointing and ultimately, we will go home without a bill. >> the trump administration has been very direct in that they really want to streamline the enormous delays that infrastructure programs encounter, environmental restrictions and all that sort of thing and it's completely correct. if you have to wait 15 years to build a bridge, the price of that bridge doubles and it's a complete tax on the consumer and shareholders and taxpayers and everything else. the other thing they want to do is private/public partnerships which some democrats have also signed on to. is there any chance that either of those proposals is going to see the light of day? >> first of all, with regard to the environmental issues, three years ago now, we passed a law called the fast act and there were methods in that to significantly speed up the environmental reviews. unfortunately, in the last two years, none of those have been

enacted by the u.s. department of transportation or at least very few of them. i know that california remains very frustrated because the reforms that we actually passed have not been used here in washington. there is more that can be done. so we do have to push these programs along quickly. often it's a case of where's the money. one side or the other not putting up the money in the process. one of the things the president called for last year, which i hope he does not do this year, was to change the ratio of money where the federal government was the major partner and the states and local governments were the small-time partner. he wanted to reverse that so the local government, state and local, had to come up with 80% of the money. that just simply won't work. at least it won't work in my district which is mostly rural. they don't have the money. >> congressman, thank you for being with us. kristina: jonathan, real quick. >> very briefly. ten years ago, republicans opposed obama's big stimulus

spending plan, bridges to nowhere. what do you think's changed among republicans now that they want to build big holes and fill them in and build bridges to nowhere just like the democrats do? what's changed for republicans? >> i don't know where you got the idea that we want to build bridges to nowhere. that was actually a republican congressman from alaska. we are for transportation. we know that we have tens of thousands of bridges that are not adequate, that are -- many of which are subject to collapse. we need to build, we must build, if we are going to move this economy, we absolutely have to do that. i find both democrats and republicans want to do that. where we have a problem is it's going to cost money. how are we going to find the money to do this. public/private partnerships are part of this. actually, i have a very, very important but small number, that is dollar public/private partnership to put in a backup system for the gps. and that's maybe maximum $400 million over ten years.

that will be a public/private partnership and give us a backup when gps goes out and you can't get to where you want to go, we'll have a backup system. kristina: congressman, thank you so much for joining us. i know we still have to answer that issue, how are we going to pay for it, but we always appreciate you coming on the show. thank you so much. >> we talk about how we will pay for it next time. thank you. kristina: we will go into detail. i want to do a quick shout-out to our viewers that are watching. we see your tweets so thank you so much for commenting. we really do appreciate it. the 2019 graduating class of morehouse college getting a big surprise during their commencement address. did they also just get a lesson on capitalism, too? find out. >> when he said it, we were all looking around like wait, did he say what i think he said? and tears just started rolling down my eyes. i jumped up and screamed oh, my goodness, like i'm debt-free. i'm debt-free.

dear tech, you've been making headlines. smart tech is everywhere. but is that enough? i need tech that understands my business. i need tech that works at scale. dear tech, dear tech, dear tech, we're using ibm blockchain to help make sure food stays fresh. we're exploring quantum to develop next generation energy. we're using ai to help create more accessible health care. we're using iot to create new kinds of digital wallets. let's see some more headlines about that. let's expect more from technology.

. .

>> on behalf of the eight generations of my family who have been in this country we're going to put a little fuel in your bus. this is my class, 2019. [cheering] and my family is making a grant to eliminate their student loans. [cheering]

>> tech billionaire robert smith stunning the 2019 graduating class of morehouse college in atlanta with a pledge to pay off their student loans. that is worth about $40 million. democrats made a point of demonizing wealth. so panel, does this serve maybe the main argument for capitalism and against socialism? jonathan, i almost think that we might agree on this. we could attack any wealthy person that pays for all the ious or the items on hold that walmart at christmastime, right? >> i'm not going to attack them. that is very generous, kristina. if you're making a argument against socialism it is not charity of successful capitalists of gentlemen, it is their individual achievement. this man african-american

gentleman been tremendously successful. he create businesses of the he employed thousands an thousands of people. he was voted the best private equity fund 10 years money. he created immense amounts of wealth. we should celebrate people making money, achieving values, not as much as giving them away. that is not the validation for capitalism as some conservatives make. >> jonathan, you're a sourpuss. this is a wonderful gift. i can't imagine a wonderful reaction. they interviewed a young man on fox news who had $200,000 in student debt in that class. needless to say he was beyond joyful the question with a tuition of $25,000 a year at that college, how did he end up with $200,000 in student loans? we need to look into the student loan program, figure it is why kids are so incredibly overburdened, spending money, way beyond their tuition and even room and board.

you know, solve this problem. because it's a huge problem for this country right now. >> if i can get unhooked from wires i would have given this man a standing ovation what he just did. tough tell you, let me read something to you. the rich and powerful are taking so much for themselves and leaving so little for everyone else. that is elizabeth warren. nice try, young lady. here is the giving pledge. 191 billionaire giving away $500 billion to help the world. billionaires are so immoral and so terrible, you know where i stand on this. >> i hope the graduates of the class of 2019 actually take this gift. whatever they budgeted every month for their student loan payments, save it, use it, make an investment to buy a house, start a small business. don't just waste it frivolously on another gaming system or getting another subscription to some other streaming service. >> amen. >> do something good with it. >> amen. one last thought.

find a commence plane speaker next year will be very tough. kristina: that have is very true. that does it for bulls an -- and bears, "the evening edit" is next. liz: one hour from now president trump holds a rally in pennsylvania. a federal judge ruled against the president for access to his financial records. ruling in favor of the democrat led house oversight committee. the white house announcing former white house counsel don mcgahn will ignore a subpoena to testify tomorrow before the house judiciary. we break down that fight tonight. early in the day the president spent a good deal of time sounding off on everything from threats to iran and hillary clinton to the genesis of russian probe. we debate should president trump and republicans zooming in hard right now on the strength of the