my first question is to mr. baker. so, mr. baker, you noted in your testimony that 100% of alaska's rail is short line rail. alaskans have long sought a rail connection that would tie alaska to the rest of the north american rail network. mr. begich: in your view what steps should we consider to support such a connection? mr. baker: that's a fabulous question. the current route of connecting is quite elaborate, involves ferries and it's not sort of realistic for where i think you would like to take the state and the country. a project like that is really a megagrant and so i think it would be important for congress to continue grant programs like infra and raise and mega that really contemplate some of these -- maybe not quite moon shot, but big-deal infrastructure programs. dollar lot of -- there are a lot of short line projects, including some on of the existing alaska, where $20 million can really move the dial and we do a lot of those and we're really proud of that. a project like you're talking about is sort of exponential

my first question is to mr. baker. mr. baker you know you're testament 1% of alaska rail is short line s rail. alaskans have long sought a real connection or tie the rest of thetw north america rail networ. annual review, what steps should we consider to support such a connection? >> is a fabulous question. the current route of connecting is quite elaborate. it involves fairies and is not realistic for where i think you would like to take the state in the country. our project like that is really a maga grant. i think it would be important for congress to continue programs the quite moonshot but big deal infrastructure programs. there are a lot of short line projects including some on the existing alaska railroad project five, 10, $20 million can really move theea dial. we do a lot of those and were proud about. the project like you are talking about is exponentially more than that. i do think the country have appetite for that kind of thing. in the project you are talking is a great example i would be thrilled to support it

[chanting] mr. baker, if i'm wrong, i would happily withdraw the remark about the eight years she's been here. >> the prime minister who -- i've raised it publicly and he knows as a minister i would not be speaking on this pacific issue. but i will remind him about others who came to me and i didn't send them away in the major we watch the review in. the reason why a national inquiry is important is because this issue is systemic. local and national officials and prosecute the politicians. this issue cannot be covered by local inquiries alone. not a single person authority has been held to account. we do not see people stop worrying about the cover up. in. >> we have to focus on the victims. mr. speaker, victims and survivors are in different places. they are worried about the delay should it took us seven years. it's very hard to come forward explain what happened. it is not sensible this can be done like this. but say 2030 -- 2031, the victims i spoke to, i agree with them on that. ... all of them. a vo

this medium and our open debate has the potential mrs. baker to revitalize representative democracy. gentleman from indiana gingrich and a small group of like minded republicans when they go on the floor every day. and they start to make these speeches which catch all of washington by surprise. they argue, democrats are not protecting the national security of the country. democrats refused to fight communism. democrats essentially are putting us all in jeopardy every time a communist movement bottles and authoritarian us ally democrats with radical views, believe the promises of the movement. every time a communist movement takes power, democratic congressman said will be fair progress, even light. and the problem was, if you're watching c span, all you could see is the person speaking, what you couldn't see was the chamber was empty was believe the promises of the movement. so democrats are furious because he was castigating and impugning their patriotism. and they weren't even there to respond. a gentleman said he was willing to engage them to by now he's willing to engage in debat

mr. president, vice president bush. vice president mondale. senator baker. speaker o'neill. reverend moomaw. and my fellow citizens, to a few of us here today. this is a solemn and most momentous occasion. and yet in the history of our nation, it is a commonplace occurrence. the orderly transfer of authority, as called for in the constitution, routinely takes place as it has for almost two centuries, and few of us stop to think how unique we really are in the eyes of many in the world. this every four years ceremony we accept as normal is nothing less than a miracle. mr. president, i want our fellow citizens to know how much you did to carry on this tradition by your gracious, cooperate nation in the transition process. you have shown i'm watching world that we are a united people pledged to maintaining a political system which guarantees individual liberty to a greater degree than any other. and i thank you and your people for all your help in maintaining the continuity, which is the bulwark of our republic. the business of our nation goes forward. these united states are c

mr. president, vice president bush, vice president mondale, senator baker, speaker o'neill, reverend moomaw, and my fellow citizens: to a few of us here today this is a solemn and most momentous occasion, and yet in the history of our nation it is a commonplace occurrence. the orderly transfer of authority as called for in the constitution routinely takes place, as it has for almost two centuries, and few of us stop to think how unique we really are. in the eyes of many in the world, this every-4-year ceremony we accept as normal is nothing less than a miracle. mr. president, i want our fellow citizens to know how much you did to carry on this tradition. by your gracious cooperation in the transition process, you have shown a watching world that we are a united people pledged to maintaining a political system which guarantees individual liberty to a greater degree than any other, and i thank you and your people for all your help in maintaining the continuity which is the bulwark of our republic. the business of our nation goes forward. these united states are confronted with an economic aff

baker wrote this in "the new york times," about what the address felt like. obviously, it was held inside the capitol rotunda, a different setting than what we're normally used to. mr. trump, he writes, spoke of national unity but made no nod toward democrats in the speech and offered no thanks to mr. biden, as other presidents have done for their predecessors. the 60th inauguration took on a feel of the state of the union address, as republicans applauded particular plans announced by the new president, while apparently uncomfortable. >> it was magnified because it was in a small room. in the state of the union, as peter baker points out, democrats are in the shot. usually, with an inauguration, everyone is very spread out. the camera can get there, but, you know, it's not as evident and not as close. yes, you really did, you saw vice president harris kind of stone faced. other democrats were squirming in their seats as he was taking it to an administration that he spent the campaign trail lambasting. you always know with president trump that it is going to be different, and it was. >> it was indeed. jackie kucinich, thank you for starting us off. >> thank you. >>