>> a government on the brink. talks continue tonight in a -- as a shutdown looms. i'm robert costa. federal programs and those who depend on them are wondering what is next and both parties pdo, too. tonight, on "washington week." president trump: there's never been a better time to hire in america, to invest in america, and to believe in the american dream, than right now. robert: president trump marks the end of his first year in office, celebrating the strength of the economy. and faces a potential government shutdown as the friday deadline looms. >> we could get this done in a few short days and not kick the can down the road. this is the fourth c.r. we have done and accomplished nothing. >> democratic senators fixation on illegal immigration has already blocked us from making

progress on long-term spending talks. that same fixation has them threatening to filibuster funding for the whole government. robert: we discuss it all with dan balz of "the washington post," kelsey snell of npr. kimberly atkins of "the boston herald" and jeff zeleny of cnn. >> celebrating 50 years, this is "washington week." funding is provided by -- >> their leadership is instinctive. they understand the challenges of today. and research the technologies of tomorrow. some call them veterans. we call them part of our team.

>> on a cruise with american cruise lines, you can experience historic destinations along the mississippi river, the columbia river, and across the united states. american cruise lines' fleet of small ships explore american landmarks, local cultures, and calm waterways. american cruise lines, proud sponsor of "washington week." >> additional funding is provided by newman's own foundation, donating all profits from newman's own food products to charity and nourishing the common good. the ethics and excellence in journalism foundation, through the ewing foundation committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. the corporation for public broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you.

thank you. >> once again from washington, moderator robert costa. robert: good evening. we are now just hours away from a potential government shutdown. but negotiations continue and the senate is scheduled to vote tonight at 10:00 p.m. we'll get to that shortly. first, how we got here. this afternoon president trump summoned chuck schumer the senate minority leader to the white house for a one-on-one meeting. >> we discussed all of the major, outstanding issues. we made some progress. we still have a good number of disagreements. the discussions will continue. >> i'm not going to vote for a c.r. >> the democrats seem to be willing to increase military spending. many republicans are willing to have a d.a.c.a. fix. and those who don't want to combine the two are just i think have i naive. robert: white house officials blame democrats for the

impasse. >> the military will still go to work. they will not get paid. the border will still be patroled. they will not get paid. fire folks will still be fighting fires out west. they will not get paid. all of these people will be working for nothing which is simply not fair. robert: you've heard the talking points but this is perhaps not just a political moment tonight but a civic one. the u.s. government on the edge of a shutdown. parties clashing. yet another fiscal standoff in a decade full of them. what explains it? not only this latest drama but the struggle for those in power to govern. dan? dan: well, the fact that we see this again and again and again over the past few months is as you say indicative of the breakdown in general in the way congress, republicans or democrats, doesn't matter who controls it, approaches these issues. the deep partisanship in this country has reached a level that makes it almost impossible

for the leaders of either party to go against their core supporters. that's what we're seeing play out. we've seen it in the past and we're seeing it again this time. robert: kim, is that baufs the partisanship in congress? president obama when he came into office thought he could break through it. president trump has a different kind of -- as a different kind of politician thought he could break through it. again and again the fiscal standoffs resort to partisanship and bickering. kim: we've seen the partisanship grow more and more every year in washington with no sign of abating. that leads us to this crisis. this isn't the first time we've had a crisis -- leadership by crisis is what we're seeing. we're pushed to a point where there is a breaking point, whether the sequester, or the budget fights. we see it over and over again where the fight is really political. if you look at it, senator graham is right. when you look at d.a.c.a., i think on policy, the two sides t. is not an unbridgeable gap.

there is a deal to be made there but a political -- no political incentive for the sides to come together. that is why we are where we are. >> one thing that is clear as dan was saying, we've seen this for several months and years, one thing that is always constant even though the people in the different offices move around, there is an erosion of trust, erosion of credibility, and it seems like nothing in this town can get done unless in a stress situation. i would call this a stress situation tonight. kimberly is absolutely right. on d.a.c.a., some 8-10 americans agree something should be done to those dreamers, the 800,000 people or so who are here as young immigrants. the reality here is that president trump is the new player in this drama. there was a sense and maybe there still is that he can lead people through this. but he is someone who had been on the both sides of every issue and that cob an advantage in this situation but still unwilling as we've seen over the last eight or nine days

from saying i'm willing to take the heat to, not willing to do it all, calling it a schumer shutdown here. we'll see what breaks the fever here. there is no trust and credibility. >> that speaks directly to the trust questions. you talk to democrats, they say they don't know what to trust about this president. they don't know how to trust their negotiating partners in congress because they keep returning to the president. they often say we saw the majority leader, mr. mcconnell, say just wednesday that they didn't know what to cut a deal on because they didn't know what the president wanted. that's an untenable situation i think when you're only two days from a shutdown. >> it is not, kelsey, just about the erosion of trust but the erosion of the budget process which you study as a reporter. i was at the capitol thursday night. so many lawmakers on both sides were complaining to me and said what happened to the way we used to appropriate, the way we used to budget? >> some of that might be people feeling wistful for a time that didn't entirely exist. the appropriations process has never been particularly functional. yeah, there was a time when they did a better job of

getting the 12 regular appropriations bills through and there was some relationship between a budget and what they spent. there is absolutely no relationship at this point and for all of the efforts that people have made to reform that, it hasn't really gone anywhere. >> there's more at stake here, kim, than just the political points because there are vulnerable populations across this country. people who count on the children's health insurance program, the dreamers who are concerned about their fate. you think about the dreamers in particular who jeff mentioned, you've mentioned as well. there is a march deadline for their status for whether they keep their permanence or not. what's on their minds tonight? >> i mean, they have to be thinking about their future. yes, the deadline is march but you have to remember there are incremental deadlines for a lot of these people that have already come up, that are coming up. they can't make decisions, can't go to school or work. it is affecting a lot of families. at the same time you have a shutdown that will affect a lot of people, too. i have a lot of friends who work for the federal government who have been texting me all day trying to understand what will happen if they stop

getting their paychecks. there are people who are protected by the chip program, young children, that expired back at the end of september. i mean, there's been a lot of consternation over that for a long period of time. you have all the time we've had to work on d.a.c.a. and chips and yet we're here at this four-hour, little less than four-hour deadline where everything is pushed to the brink and there are real lives at stake and real human beings on the other side of this. >> bob, you mentioned the issue of power and i think that goes to the heart of what we're looking at here. we are in a period and have been for some time in which control of both the house and senate are seemingly generally in play. when you have that environment, the incentive for the leadership and even the rank and file is to do whatever they can to maximize their advantage for the upcoming election rather than solving problems as they come forward. the idea that the chip program has been in abayans for months,

everybody has known it, they keep putting it aside thinking we can deal with it later, they know they have a march deadline on d.a.c.a., yet they go through this cycle month by month saying, well, we really don't have to do anything. and they're trying to squeeze out whatever they can in terms of an agreement to make the other party look like they've caved, to put the other party in a bad spot. >> talking about the election dynamic, jeff, you think about the leadership in both parties, seem to be angling for their parties' base to make sure the base voters are revved up for the 2018 mid terms. at the same time some of the vulnerable senators, are red state democrats like joe donnelly of indiana gave an intriguing floor speech today and said it is our most basic duty, our job to keep the government open. so amid all of these base dynamic there are some moderates to each party saying, keep it open. >> no question about it. and joe donnelly is one of those blue democrats who comes from a red state. there's actually -- it has increasingly become somewhat of

an extinct species certainly in the house of representatives in the blue dog democrats, you know, essentially wiped away in the 2010 mid-term elections. but that is certainly a dynamic to watch tonight and into the weekend as i believe this shutdown discussion will continue here. what do those red state democrats do? by and large i think most of them will vote "yes" on this because they do not want the shutdown to affect them. but you're right. the politics of this are uncertain. democrats of course have a less to lose here because they don't have the majority at all. you know, republicans certainly will probably get more blame. but individually seat by seat some of these democrats have a lot to risk here. we also shouldn't forget the republicans who are saying they're going to vote no. white house press secretary sarah sanders this evening has been calling out individually senators by name. clair mccaskill of missouri, joe donnelly of indiana, don't you want to support the troops? as of this moment she has not mentioned the republicans like

lindsey graham who are also opposed to this c.r. >> kelsey, 10:00 p.m. tonight after an 8:30 meeting of senate democrats there is a scheduled vote in the senate. this will be taking up the bill passed on thursday by house republicans. it extends the government funding for about a month. what do you expect from that senate vote tonight? >> i think it all hinges on what happens inside that room with democrats at 8:30. if chuck schumer can go in there and tell them he has wrested some sort of valedictorian areary from president trump or that he expects -- some sort of victory from president trump or expects president trump will say, yes, there is some deal, there will be an opportunity for a vote on d.a.c.a., on a number of issues in the next month or so, then it is possible they could break off a few more people. but it is entirely dependent on whether or not they can claim a victory enough so schumer can walk away and prove to his base that he satisfied their desires to fight really hard on d.a.c.a. while also satisfying the number of people who believe they are, like you said, there to govern. there is a large portion of the

democratic party who view themselves as having a responsibility here. robert: kim, regardless of what happens on friday, whether a few days they extend the government, a shutdown, maybe they extend the funding for a month, there are still going to be ongoing talks about immigration. jeff mentioned senator graham. he is opposed to this short-term deal. he has been clark with senator tom cotton of arkansas, a hard line conservative on immigration. will the republicans be able to come to grips with the d.a.c.a. issue the president has at times supported? will they come to a deal in the coming weeks? >> i think it depends on what the president does and says. the ball is really in his court here. he is the one who is in the position to bring the different factions of his party together and say we're going to cut this kind of deal. this is what you get and this is what you want. he is the art of the deal guy. this gives him the opportunity to do that. you are exactly right. even tonight it depends on what the president was willing to give to the democrats. if there is any movement tonight. i certainly think he is the one

to take center stage there. >> it is coming up on one year since he's been in office. i was looking back at what he said a year ago january 20 about d.a.c.a. specifically. in the conversation with senator durbin he said we're going to take care of those kids. we're like a year on here. he still has a chance to change this dynamic here. we'll see if he does it. >> but i think his instinct is to want to try to do something on that front. as he showed at that televised meeting at the white house. and yet there are people around him who have a different view of what the bottom line should be in terms of a deal. i think the republicans on the hill see john kelly, the chief of staff, as their ally in holding the president's feet to the fire on a deal to make sure that they get the provisions they want on border security along with the d.a.c.a. agreement. i think that's part of the tension we're seeing play out. robert: what do you make of the tension with general kelly the white house chief of staff?

he had some tension with the president this week about comments in an interview, kind of walking back the wall pledge for the president. the president was unhappy with that according to various reports. they still seem to be working together. >> i think there is a working relationship there. and general kelly, you know, in a sense got into a corner in that private meeting up on the hill and said some things that the president was unhappy with. we know the president doesn't like to be talked about in a negative way behind his back. but, nonetheless, i think he recognizes what kelly has been able to do at the white house, which is to certainly calm things down and he has confidence in him on this immigration issue. remember, he came from homeland security and the president had great confidence in the work he was doing there before he brought him over to the white house. dan: kelsey, the military is at the center of this debate as well. defense secretary jim mat is spoke sharply on friday -- jim mattis spoke sharply in friday about shutdowns and continuing resolutions, and he said it

would have a huge morale impact, affect facilities. it is not just mattis's comments we were paying attention to but the military spending debate on capitol hill. where does that stand amid all of this political drama? >> right. so the big issue here is that republicans say they want to increase military spending as part of a long-term spending deal. democrats generally agree with that idea. they view north korea as a very serious threat and they think it makes absolute sense the military would need more money. they are advocating for there to be an equal increase in domestic spending in part because there are some programs within the domestic side of the discretionary budget that are growing at a very rapid pace. in particular, the veterans choice program, which was created so that veterans would have other options for getting health care, is growing at a tremendous rate and is taking up a larger portion of what is becoming a smaller part of the spending pie. so that is difficult but it sounds like even talking to democrats that that deal is much, much easier for them than d.a.c.a. they think they are pretty close on that.

>> the military seems to want -- republicans, too, on capitol hill want to ease the spending caps. there seems to be an appetite for that. they are also angry at the fiscal standoff because they're not addressing the issue. >> no question. the military once again as we've seen again and again in these fights regardless of who is in charge the military is sort of held up as an example of democrats are going to try and hurt the military. i mean, the reality is i was having an e-mail conversation with someone i know who is in a military family today and they are sick of this actually. i mean, yes they will still get paid but it is the spending and the short-term situations. and what you don't really hear from this president and administration as much is that, you know, the war in afghanistan, we're sending more troops there. that is escalating. we don't talk nearly enough about the substance of these numbers, what is behind them and then actually using the military as a weapon if you will. so i think that it's been a fairly ugly debate the last

couple days sort of using the military as a weapon. robert: dan, what is the political cost of all of this kind of paralysis on capitol hill? you think about the shutdown in 2013, senator ted cruz, the texas republican was the crusade inner that fight. people thought republicans would face immense consequence in 2014 yet the republicans ended up winning the senate the next year. it's unpredictable to see how it plays out with the mid terms. >> go back to 2011 with the big battle over the debt ceiling and the efforts on the part of president obama and speaker boehner to cut a grand deal which blew up. it was the white house calculation going into that that if it blew up all of the fallout would end up on the republicans. that wasn't the case. president obama took a hit at that moment as did the republicans. i went back today and looked at some of the polling in 2013 about the shutdown. approval of congress dropped nine points between september before the shutdown and october

after the shutdown. the republican numbers went down. yet as you say, you know, as everybody was predicting dire consequences for the republican party in the moment, by the time you got to the november elections, bigger forces had taken over and they were able to have a big victory. socal collating what the long-term -- so, calculating what the long-term impact is beyond the fact that it creates further distrust and disgust of washington, it is very hard to tell. >> and, given the news cycle in a trump administration war new headline at any given day can completely change the conversation, as soon as the government is back up and running, within hours it could be a nonissue to what's going on and certainly by the time the mid terms roll around it may not be a factor at all. >> november seems very far away. >> for the children health insurance program, this has had such bipartisan support. are we really looking at a long-term fix this year? or is this again going to be a political football as the c.r.

debates perhaps continue? >> well, the very shortest version of an existential that we've been hearing about is six years. that is what is included in the bill that would be coming up for a vote at 10:00. like you said, bipartisan support for this. it was created in part by senator oren hatch of utah. he just announced he is retiring and would very much like it to be part of his legacy this is a long standing fix. robert: people who don't sometimes qualify for medicaid count on this. >> it has capped about 5% of a family's annual income, that is the most they'd pay for services and it is about 9 million kids. >> jeff, if the government does shut down, what does that mean for people who are federal workers or rely on federal programs? is it sweeping? do they turn all the lights off? >> not exactly especially because it is happening on friday evening. the white house believes it gives them a little more breathing room. i talked to mick mulvaney the director of the office of management and budget this evening.

he said, look. we may not meet the deadline by midnight. the reality here now is something extraordinary would have to happen for a vote to happen before midnight but they believe they have a couple more days over the weekend. the reality is things start happening. the agencies have submitted their reports, there are shutdown plans. the white house says there will be minimal disruption ares. national parks will still be open. if this goes into next week that is where you'll see things. important things like the centers for disease control. there is a flu outbreak, epidemic going on, 30 young children killed. some 63% of workers would have to be furloughed the agency said today. there are real consequences. yes, people get paid at the end of the day. some conservatives are fine with it shutting down because they believe government is too big anyway. you will start to feel it at some point but not immediately. robert: i was doing some research today. the postal service does continue. you get your mail because the 500,000 postal service employees are exempt from the furlough because it is

self-funded. if you are a recipient of social security, supplemental security income, unemployment insurance, those pro-grams are not dependent on congress's explicit funding. the i.r.s. is perhaps not going to have some people available as they try to figure out the tax bill. back to politics senator schumer of new york appears on the scene meeting with the president one-on-one at the white house. this new york democrat getting along with a former democrat in the white house. what does it tell us? >> well, the optics are striking. they clearly do have a relationship. they have sparred a lot this year. yet there is some history between the two of them and as we know that is important to donald trump. those prior relationships do have an impact. i think what was interesting was he went down there. there were no republican-elected officials in that room. they had a conversation. but as you showed at the beginning of the program, he had a message, schumer had a

message that went in two directions. well, we made some progress but we still have a lot of deep differences. we've gone through the day and it looks as though the differences have not exactly been resolved. so the deal making president wasn't able to make a deal with a very practical minded majority leader who is also worried very much about his base. >> as that meeting was going on some house republicans were suddenly worried chuck schumer is in the oval office for 90 minutes with the president. we're going to get rolled there. it is interesting the president made this decision for people -- with four people in the room. senator schumer and his chief of staff, the president and his chief of staff. no one else. that is the first time i can remember this happening in this administration. the president is famous for filling up every seat at the board room and sitting in the middle and having televised meetings. extraordinary. >> those circumstances certainly caused some panic on the hill. i was in the halls and it was palpable s there were a number of chiefs of staff saying what

do you think is going to happen? they're going to take away our bargaining power, very worried. >> they were asking the reporters. the republican party just passed a major tax bill with president trump a month ago. a month later they're worried about him going over to the democratic side. >> it is true and nobody is talking about the tax bill right now. a lot of american people are saying how is congress celebrating passing a bill regarding companies when people may not get paid in a week or two. the economy is doing well and it is the eve of the president's inauguration. all of these things are getting stepped on by this. robert: thank you so much. kim, dan, jeff, kelsey. we'll turn back to watching the floor in a few minutes. thanks everybody for watching. don't go anywhere because the "washington week" extra is

coming up next on most pbs stations. i'll talk to two of the best investigative reporters about the white house probe and steve bannon getting two subpoenas this week plus explain why many medicaid recipients soon have to work to qualify for health benefits. if you missed the show or extra watch it online friday nights and all weekend long at pbs.org/washington week. tune into the pbs newshour this weekend for the latest on the government shutdown. i'm robert costa. thanks for watching. >> funding for "washington week" is provided by --. >> their leadership is instinctive. they understand the challenges of today and research the technologies of tomorrow.

some call them veterans. we call them part of our team. >> american cruise lines. proud sponsor of "washington week." >> additional funding is provided by newman's own foundation donating all profits from newman's own food products to charity and nourishing the common good. the ethics and excellence in journalism foundation, ku and patricia euin through the foundation committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. the corporation for public broadcasting, and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. station from viewers like you. thank you.

[representative john lewis] i just happen to believe that in every personality there's something good, there's something decent, there's something sacred. and we don't have a right to go around damaging another personality. so i believe in nonviolence as a way of life, as a way of living. dr. martin luther king, jr. assassinated memphis, tennessee, april 4th, 1968. [lewis] tell the story. tell the story. and tell it over and over again. we must free ourselves, the way of violence, the way of division. we can lay down this heavy burden. hate is too heavy a burden to bear. with most people, they just don't see john lewis giving a speech, they feel john lewis in terms of what he's done and the impact on this country, so therefore they listen.