joining us live on the phone is david drucker who is following all of this as congressional reporter for the washington examiner. he's on capitol hill, thanks very much for being with us. >> guest: good to be here. >> host: outline the framework of this deal. what happened between last night's three-and-a-half hour closed-door session, the discussions overnight and what we saw two hours ago on the senate floor? >> guest: well, what appears -- a couple of things. the members on both sides of the aisle were telling us this morning that following the nearly four-hour closed-door session in the old senate chamber there was a pretty broad consensus that nobody wanted to mess with the filibuster rules because of the fear about where it could lead the chamber in terms of making it, i guess, more like the house of representatives which does function along majority rule lines. number two, they were worried, i think, about, you know, what it was going to mean for the chamber going forward for the rest of this congress, because there's a number of things that republicans and democrats want to t

. >> david drucker is the senior correspondent for the "washington examiner." the senate has its own unusual ways and rules but for the folks at home who don't pay, you know, close attention to how the senate operates, explain to us the stakes here, david? >> well, jon, this is a, an unprecedented situation in that what senator reid is considering doing is changing the rules of the senate on a straight 51-vote margin. normally it takes, well the rules, say it takes 67 votes to change the rules. that is why this is being called the nuclear option. it is not simply they want to alter the filibuster rules. by the way the rules change would not apply to judicial nominations, not to life-time appointments t would apply to a president's cabinet and agency appointments. republicans say if democrats go ahead and do this, they will jam up the chamber and make democrats life miserable. the way the senate works, here is a key thing for viewers, everything in the senate, i mean everything, committee hearings, the ability to speak on the floor at any given time operates on

david drucker is senior correspondent for the washington examiner. n the media throw around terms like grand bar gain all the -- bargain all the time. the politicians on capitol hill know what it means, david, but what is the definition of the grand bargain? >> i think these days, jon, it's any deal you can reach on fiscal issues. look, september 30th the fiscal year ends and government funding is going to have to be renewed or there's going to be a shutdown. and also this fall into and into the winter you're going to have to raise the debt ceiling, and i think you need to rook at this from the perspective of the two chambers of congress. in the senate you have republicans that appear more interested than republicans are in the house this attempting to reach a deal with the administration. there have been low-level but very consistent talks between senate republicans and the white house for the past couple of months, and it's going to be about whether they can resolve the issue that always trips these things up, and that's taxes. do you raise them, do

david drucker is senior correspondent for the "washington examiner." he joins us now. thank you for joining us. >> good to be here, heather. heather: so is the irs stonewalling? >> well i think part of this is the usual friction you have between a legislative branch and the executive branch particularly when the parties are different and you have one side trying to get information and the other side is sort of protective of its turf but i think part of this could be that the administration changed its tact on the irs situation. in the beginning the president was outraged and the argument was that clearly something wrong happened. it shouldn't have happened but it wasn't political and there was no political motivation behind it and now what you're hearing from both the president and his aides are, this is a phony scandal that doesn't exist and what you've heard from democrats on the hill is a transition from outrage, this shouldn't have happened, we hope it is not political to, it wasn't political at all. we know it's not political. progressive groups were also targeted

david drucker senior correspondent for the "washington examiner" joins us now.re we learning about the change to subsidies? and we realize there will not be a lot of oversight. why is that happening? >> we'll need to find more about this, jenna, but the bottom line here the law is extremely unwieldy. it's big. it's large. as the executive branch goes about making up regulations and rules that are supposed to reflect the spirit of the legislation, they're finding that it's difficult and they're finding that it is going to be very difficult to run smoothly and i wouldn't be surprised in this particular case if they're worried the only way they can check these things out in terms of who is eligible for subsidies would be such a way to possibly deny people who are eligible or think they're eligible from actually receiving these subsidies. so think would rather encourage people to enroll and take advantage of this and make the process cumbersome and find people getting rejected that believe that they're eligible and you know, not getting something you think that you'

at this hour, david trucker, senate republicans meeting -- david drucker, senator republicans meeting and senate democrats are meeting, what is going on behind closed doors, based on what you've heard from senate colleagues over the last couple of hours? >> any time you've got a situation where, for instance, on the republican side john mccain and a few other talking to a numb of republicans and democrats thorninge democratic side, you had senator schumer talking to senators on both sides of the aisle, you have reid and mcconnel doing similar things. at some point you have to get together and outline every aspect of the deal, register any complaints from your members, maybe sure everybody is heard and then everybody is ok with this fwoning forward,s the senate which means anybody can go to the floor and start jamming things up if they want to and these can be fragile. the wail this -- the way this came together, there's one no resolution to the issue of filibustering executive branch nominees, or threatening to go gow ahead with the nuclear option which the democrats have the votes to

. >> david drucker who is joining us on capitol hill. he's a washington correspondent for the "washington examiner." thanks for being with us. >> the house is coming back in to debate a few bills easing regulations on small airplanes and oil pipeline standards. s an nays are ordered. or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move so suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 1848. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 109, h.r. 1848, a bill to ensure that the federal aviation administration advances the afety of small airplanes and the continued development of the general aviation industry and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman wish to call up that bill as reported? as amended? >> i wish to call up the report. the speaker pro tempore: as amended. >> as amended. the speaker pro tempo

david drucker of the washington examiners as we came a lot closer as he exited when asked about whether or not the conflict had been defused and another saying that senator rockefeller says he believes a filibuster deal can be reached for tomorrow morning avoiding in a clear option. next week joins us from san angelo, texas on the republican line. good evening. >> good evening. thank you. i am just puzzled because the constitution is said to be saying that the simple majority is what rules in the senate. and i am reading article one section five. each house may determine the rules of the proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior and with the concurrence expel. there are other places where two-thirds are needed to get any business done. i personally prefer for the minority to be able to use the filibuster. that is all there is to that. thank you. >> thank you for the call. earlier tonight we also checked in with the longtime former democratic senator, byron dorgan, who served 18 years in the senate, democratic from north dakota. retired in 2010 and offered his perspective o