tonight on questioned newsroom, four weeks and counting. we'll look at how the long shutdown in the nation's hisry is facting californians. also utility giant pg & e is planning to file for bankruptcy what it means for customers, clean energy goals and victims of wildfires. hello and welcome to newsroom. i'm thuy vu. asked esday nancy pelo the president to delay his state of the union. she said without reopening the nment there would be security concerns. president trump isn't budging from plans deliver his address this month. the trump administration is

considering moving disaster money to the border wal that could affect repairs and flood control projects in california. joining missjo is garamendi, who serves on the infrastructure committee. nice to have you back. >> good to be with you. i wanted to ask you aboute zzfeed report that's asserting that president trump directed his former lawyer, mihael cohen, to lie to congress about trump's role in a negotiation to build a skyscraper in moscow. what are your thoughts on that? >> well, everybody says, i true, it is a crime and thefore it's an impeachable offense. it happens to be the me offense that richard nixon committed, and ulmately was impeached, though he was not tried in the senate. he resigned because of all of that. obstruction of justice, very,

very simple. if it is true -- we're fing to d out. we're moving along. the mueller investigation is moving along. now that the democrat versus subpoena power wee find out. you're saying if true, it rises to the level of obstruction of justice, will you be calling for impeachment proceedings? >> i think there will be an outcry for impeachment proceedings, both as a result of the mueller investigation, which may have this information, or the result of subpoenas and other testimony before congraps. rently there's backup informationis to charge. we'll see, a it's probably not very far away. why suggest probably a couple months we may know what it's all about. >> is this something you would support or call for? >> if this is true, absolutely. this is an impeachable offense. >> i wanted to ask about the government shutdown. president trump did not embrace

a government proposal to the government for three weeks, to allow time for negotiations. on the other side, house speaker has called the wall immoral. is there a way forward at this point? >> absolutely. we must open up government. we haveed nine pieces of legislation in the last two weeks, since january 3r, for the purposes of opening up government. all or part ot we've even gone just last yesterday with another piece of legislation that would give until february 28th, opening government. why? so that there would b time to negotiate. so there would be time to negotiate. this is and has been a very serious problem. we're seeing the american economy takes a severe hit. we're seeing 800,000 federal employees, and who knows how manyonactors losing the opportunity to have a paycheck and the contractors to have their contracts. i have situations here in the sacramento area. i have contractor that is don't

know what they're going to do, because they're small and they're going to be out of business as a result of this.p open this government. this is an issue where mitch mcconnell has gotd to lead not be a puppet to trump. >> but both sidesave dug in hair heels, right? the president said he won't back away from the money he wants for the border wall form the democrats are saying we're not giving you that money. what will be the tipping point for this to get resolved? like you said, so many people are impacted. >> open up the government. take up any one of those nine bills that ar sitting on the senate floor. senator mcconnell and the a republicans an opportunity to put it on the president's desk.ry we've been vclear, open up the government and we'll talk about what we're going to do. we've offered -- in fact, in thg lation that was before congress, before the christmas break, $1.6 billion for border security. en the president at the very

last moment demand $5 billion. then a day or two later he want5.7 billion without any specification of where it would be built, what his purpose would be, how it would solve problems. we know we have to be smart with taxpayer money. open up this government. we know there's some parts of that boer fence that have been built 20, 30 years ago that need to be repaired. we ca talk about that. but it is unconscionable that theresident would simply hold not only the employees and the federal employees and all of the contractors hostage, but now the total american economy is being held hostage for his campaign pledge. >> how do you think california will fare in all of this?y alrehe president has said, he's threatening to divert money from the army corps of engineers. some of that money has already been approved forca fornia. what projects are at risk here? >> this is something that --ng you're goo do what, mr. president? you're going to declare a emergenc

you're going to go to the civil works program of the army corps of engineers, which we have put about 15 billi$15 billion for d relief. and 2.5 billion of that are forl ornia, specific flood protection, in the south bay of san francisco bay. we're talking about the cupertino area. we're talking about the san jose area, all of flood protection, we know the sea level is coming up. we know that sacramento is the most eaflood-prone in america. we have more than 2 million people at risk. small cities like marysville, 17,000 peopl just $13 million, but that was absoluty critical money on a city that literally is dsurroun by 35-foot levees. >> what wll happen if they projects are delayed or canceled? >> i just drove up the sacramento river to get he from my home, down in the delta.

the sacramento river isll flowi right now. will they projects make a differen this winter? no, but these projects would be under way next winter, next summer. not so ma months away and they would provide additional o ction. will it make a difference? we don't know, but it could make all the difference between a horrible flood or no flood at all. in puerto rico, another $2.5 billion to shore up the levees nd dams in the area that were totally destroyed 2 1/2iers in thehurricane, it is unconscionable that the president would reach out and ke away that money. >> how serious is the president at this point about this threat that 's making. >> we've backed him down a bit, but nonetheless he's kept alive the threat that he has the power to issue a national emergency, and based upon the laws on the books, which frankly should be

changed, and i have introduced legislation to change those laws, he could dipnto the civil works. >> all right. >> he could also dip into the u.s. military's military construction projects. we have to rein in his power, not just this way, but also with the national emergencies. >> john garamendi, congressman from sacramento valley, thank you for your time. >> thank you. thank you. on monday, pg & e declared it would file for bankruptcy protecti at the end the month. the utility sis it featses $30 million in liability costs from wildfires. the company said, quote, we do not expect any impact of service to ourcustomers. stock prices have declined fire broke out some fire victims blame pg & e and have already filed lawsuits. dyhe company is alre on probation for violatinger f

safety rules when one of the gas pipelines exploded and killed eight people in san bruno. pg & e did not respond to our request to appear on thera pr joining us to discuss the issue is california state senator jerry hale. thank you so much for being here. you were one of t bout is your reaction this? >> i was shocked, but not surprised. they have a cash flow problem. they nero to work tgh that. by declaring bankruptcy, it allows everyone to reflect on it. >> t they are solvent. >> they are, and they have a lot of money and resources, but they don't have aot of cash. we don't know what those liabilities will be for th res of 2018 yet. we're pretty clear on the 2017 ones, but not the 2018 ones.

it's premature, but it allows us to plan how to look at a utility inth california at end of the day. do you think there should be a bailout plan? >> no, absolutely not. i didn't vote for one last year and woul't vote for one today. they don't deserve a payout. the rate payers should not be stuck with that liability. >> what will be the effect? >> the bail jowl will call for eater rates and higher rates on all of us going forward. haat we have to do is make sure that theholders are -- that they pay their pce that the company itself with the assets covered those costs of liability. are ways of doing that, but pg & e comes to theecture and says two choices, bankruptcy or bailout. there are otherions and choices. n fact, they produced one where they had aback-door -- behind closed door solution to this

problem last year at the same time they were negotiating with legislature. they had a plan to cover the cost, but they didn't tell anyone about it. >> so you've already said you don't think this should be a il t. what's the best path forward? >> i think what we have to look at are restructuring the company. the legislature last year said they were too big to fail. i fail they're too bill to proceed. they have a gas and electric division, which will give them into a position and a sigh that's more manageable, something they can work with and not as cumbersome as it has been. i think that's the first step. also, change the management of the company. it's not been a good management effort and team, change the really directors to change the culture of pg & e. what we want is a utility that provides a safe, reliable service at a reasonable rate. they failed us. >> you seem to be saying you would support all this restructuring and let them stay

private. do you think the state should take over pge? & >> the state probably not takeh over utility, but perhaps there'spp othertunities that could do it. san francisco is right now talking about taking over the pg & eut dn system within the city. other cities are talking about it asell. >> what about wildfire victims? they're suing, they're con that a bankruptcy may mean they're not entitled to the claims that they are entitled to. >> going back many years ago there was the asbestos settlements, the bankruptcies that were involved there. there were trust fences established. we could do the same ith fire victims. at the end of the day, the public utilities commission will have toapprove any bankruptcy settlements or restructuring. that will give u and t state and the puc an opportunity to

structure that in a way to protect those victims. >> is that something you'll push for? >> definitely. tepayers and victims are the most important part of anyen settl we have to deal with. >> pg & e declared bankruptcy once before in 2001. what did lawmakers learn from that situation that could be applied now? >> i think two things. pg & e was w goringh the governor at the time in 2001. they were looking to find a settlement d the governor said at the time what a slap in the face that was. what we have leaoued is can't really trust pg & e in the negotiations, and two, you have to be able to have a public utilities commission and memberships of that commission a who are hones who are looking out for the ratepayers' t.est inter

back then we didn't have that. i would call it an incest out relationship back then, and that pretty much gave them everything they wanted, which cos us a lot more. >> but also there were problems with the cpuc's relationship with pg & e even after the zambuno explosion that happened in your district. >> absolutely. >> we started learning about very cozy relationships. >> very cozy. that's because the same people that were there in 2001 were still there. >> do you have more trust now? >> i have greater confidence, they' good, hone people and they're putting the interests of the public at heart. that's l.criti >> how would you hope that governor newsom hane this? he's barely in office. >> so far i think he's done a great job. he's stepped back, evaluating everything, not makin any rash decisions, and we have to find out what pg & e goin todo?

will they actually file or not? >> state senator jerry hill, thank you so much for being here. >> thank you. it was a pleasure. pg & e serves about 16 million customers over 70,000 squa miles. while it's unlikely the lights will go out, you could eventually pay more for the power. it could also jeopardizes the at s green goals. but investing heavily in solar and wind projects may now be out of reach for the trunld utility. joining mess join us is, and severin boren stein, and loretto lynch, a former president of the californiac utility commission, the state agent tasked with relating. welcome to you all. lisa, let 'begin withyou. is a bankruptcy filing

inevible, or could a plan prevent that? >> we could see a plan like that. thepstate could s in, or the idministration or also pg & e could d not to filed, which seems unlikely. we've also seen shareholder activity in the last week. one hedge fund wrote a protest etter, says the bankruptcy is unnecessary. >> loretta, how unlikely is the scenario? pg and e says it c has nooice but to do this because of a wildfire liabilities and other liabilities from climate changeu what do ake of the company's statement? >> it's absolutely pg & e's rhaps filechoice to for bankruptcy in order to leverage the state, the policymakers and get as much money as they can out of the ratepayers' pockets. this doesn't need to happen. >> why do you say that?

>> pg & e has plenty of they're talking about things that haven't been assessed yet, and theplenty of money to keep the lights on. this is a strategic corporate that hasy a corporatio proven it is out of control. >> what is the role of the california public utilities commission here. you used to be the president. is it possibly to blame, because it is the agency responsible for ing the agency? >> absolutely they're partly to blame. th has been way too cozy and let corporations get away with way too much. mostly the puc has failed in the central jo which is to keep the system safe, to protect the ratepayers, victims and users. >> what do you thinkhey should do now, given the plan that pg and e has declared? >> t puc is an integral part

of the reorganization. they cannot emerge from the bankruptcy, unless the puc approves of the deal. that's why it's so critical the puc islied with the new administration. >> professor, there are sroe enental implications here as well. california has ambitious plans to transfer to 33% renewable energy sources by 2020. pg & e is the larger investor in frastructure for energy efficiency, for electric vehicles. how will this plan to declare nkruptcy affect all that? >> i think regardless of whether they declarekr btcy, pg & e will be very distracted over the next few yearsith t lawsuits and dealing with fires. so this is going to be a major distraction. i talked to people in the company who are working on those environmental initiatives. they have confirmed that that's just not where the fors is ht now. they're worried about what to do

in the next week over the financial issues. this is going t be a much more complex bankruptcy than we saw during the california electricity crisis. >> back in> 2001. back in 2001. now we're faced with a lot of choices on how to move forward from here that really discussed them. no one was talking about converting the utility tod publicly owor breaking it up into smaller pieces. now we are talking about those, and i think that would be a central part of the discussion through this bankruptcy. >> can you give us a spshot of the potential ripple effect toc otheran energy sources that do business withg and e? how big a market is that and how could this bankruptcy affect those providers? renewableearly at 33% energy, headed to 50% by 2030. there are a lot of providers that have long-term contract

with pg & e. that's a play akr btcy judge would try to harvest money from. so this will have a ripple effect throughout th renewable community. if they ha to transfer money, a bankruptcy judge is looking ta est money for a certain set of creditors. thaims their pry goal. that's not how the company runs or the regulator is run, so really it changes the focus away from these stat goals and more towards simply moving money around. >> i would lik to respectfully disagree with my good friend severen. i see several parallels. both of them are corporate strategic choices, to be able to leverage state policymakers and get every si pleny they possibly can from the ratepayer. senator john burton, the head of

the senate then argued we need add dollar for a hot dog. if we were going to pay a dallas we should get a hot dog. that wasn't accepted by the davisadministration then. i certainly hope the new administration seri considers all options. frankly it's time to get the priva profit tiering pg & e corporate executives out of the picture and spend tho profits on the victims. >> i think one of the things that's also different than in 2001 is pg & e is a convicted felon. >> from the san bruno explosion. >> they're a under court order to not commit any morecrimes. here will be a hearing in two weeks to see whether some of fires, what's goinghen e? he's already issued an order ordering pg & e toat look their electrical lines and see whether they are safe right now.

>> lisa really has a important point. this is an order to show cause. what it does iskey and critical. right now the probation conditionsofthe convicted flob, pg & e corporation, only addressed the gas system. the judge is saying for the first time he's going to add probation conditions that address the electrical system, the transmission lines. how they respond and whether they agreeor whether they fight, will be a critical piece of information we should all assess in terms of their willingness to stepup, take responsibility and do the right thing, or their continued rogue actions as a corporation that denies responsibility at every turn. >> where do you see all of this going, right? back in 2001, that bankruptcy deal resulted in a bailout pack package where ratepayers were

saddle with a higher rate. do you think they'll be protected at this time? >> no, frst of all there isn't enough money to cover all of that libility. some of this will get get pushed off somewhere. it could be paid by the government. it could be foisted on the people who boar the losses. i ink the easiest thing political is to push it off on a rars. i think it's very unlikely thaty rats will come through it unscathed.i shareholders certainly lose a lot of money, probably all of their money and we'll have there larger debate, regaless of the actions of pg and e. what is the rit way o organize are our electrical system, given theg increas wildfire risks? >> what are the challenges with a publicly owned utility? >> it's time. time for the state to seriously take a look at the mechanisms that would be necessary to take

it over. we need t t profit out system. it's not a radical idea. every state in the union has utilities. even california has 22, the biggest of which e saramento. they're not perfect -- >> i'm not sure i would agree. i think there's very good public utilities, but also good investor-owned utilities. i do agree with l should be considering that alternative, particularly in light of the muchreater regulation that would be required on the side, considered the risk, this used to be a industry widows ands orph invested in, because the investments were so reliable. seat's not the c anymore. i think we have to consider alternative forms of utilities. >> how much risk do you think there is of other utilities and businesses across the country

facing this kind of stress because of climate change? >> i think it differ regionally. california, clearly the drought andi forest issue, is the major issue. in other areas it's hurricane it's floods, coastal flooding. all of these will be ath eat. one difference will wile fires is that the wildfire may start because a utility action, unlike a hurricane, and therefore there's ts question o how much of that they are then responsible for. to the extent they are held responsible for the entire damage of it, that iemore than alue of the firm. whereas when we've sh n problems wie hurricanes and utilities, they were just blamed for the fall joy. >> going impact to your earliero nt, where you're not sure if it better to have to have a public utilities, investor-owned is a common model, but why don't

they have the sam problems that pg & e has? >> i thinkf there's a lot questions about infrastructure and maintenance. there's no question that pg & ee does have lines in rural areas of california that can be heart to get to andarmore fire-prone. there are more people living in those areas. whether there is a re, the fires are more deadly. we've seen that in the north ban during the camp fire. hour, pg & e, they are convicted felons, and they've had issue he throughoutyear. i think that climate change is certainly a part of this, but whether pg & e is maintaining their lines, that's part of the equation. >> i really disagree we should let pg e off the hook because of claim change. if that were two, our other utilities would have similar problems with the alurban/ru

interface. the only utilities with the catastrophes and only utility that's choosing to declare bankruptcy is pge. there are some good utilities that maintain their s protect customers. pg & e has lost the tru of california. we will leave it there. lisa, la ver, and severen, thank you all. that will do it for us. as always you can find more of our coverage at kwed.org. thank you for joining us. i'm thuy vu. ♪

robert: the white house denies a report thathe president urged his lawyer to lie. but russi pile up.questions i'm robert costa. welcome to "washington week." ♪ >> this is "washington week."g fundins provided by -- >> i was able to turn the aircraft around and the mission arou was able to save two men's lives that night. >> my first job helped me to grow up pretty quickly. >> in 2001 i signed up for the air force. two days later, 911 happened -- 9/11 happened.