administrative expenses in u.s. health care. health-care expenses are a major drain on the economy. 30% of the health care bill in the u.s., $1 trillion a year, is devoted to administrative expense. that is approximately twice what the united states spends on caring for cardiovascular disease and three times what we spend on treating cancer. most of the expenses for billing and insurance related services, two thirds of which are occurring providers offices. hospitals, gilded nursing facilities, and the like. there are several reforms that would reduce administrative costs in the u.s. some of these have been picked up by other witnesses. let me try to give them a bit of a typology. first is simplifying the complexity with which patients are coded. for example, when a patient visits the emergency department, they are one of five different codes that can be put in. the particular code depends on the past history of the patient and other conditions. as a result, an enormous amount of manpower spent searching through the

rvp parity would boost economy prices -- acting administrator acting administrator wheeler, i encourage you to follow through on the president's directive and remove this unnecessary and ridiculous restriction. i look forward to working with you on these issues. i know we will have many discussions to follow. mr. wheeler: i look forward to those. sen. inhofe: taking the prerogative of the chairman, i want to recognize myself for a unanimous consent. last week, a story -- the article was from sandra dunphy, an independent analyst who testified before the energy and commerce committee. i ask unanimous consent to enter this article into the record at this point. without objection, so ordered. senator whitehouse. senator whitehouse: i viewed your predecessor's tenure as one characterized by a tawdry behavior in office, a desire to do damage to the agency that he led a , flagrant absence of transactional integrity and horrible environmental policies. i see you as a remedy to three of those four. so, in that sense i welcome you. appreciate itu i very much your courtesy and having the in. i ve

it seems like the trump administration is challenging that. host: under the -- guest: under the clean air act, california have so much smog it address the issue before the clear act was signed by president in. -- president nixon. they needed a waiver on the epa to set their own rules and over the course of the last 40 years, they have gotten 100 waivers to do state specific emissions rules. this waiver was granted to them in 2013 and the administration is proposing to withdraw the waiver and suggesting that the 1975 law that set the corporate average fuel economy program, the numbers on your label, that law preempts the state from setting their own rules. that position has never been challenged in court. until now, california has been allowed to proceed. you will see a legal battle whether states can set their own emissions. standards,eezing the will that mean the price of a new car will go up, down, stay the same? does this change what cars would cost in the future? guest: fascinating question because there are so many impacts. automobiles ar

, but on the administration. primaryabout the direct care model, in which a patient pays a monthly fee and the doctor does not know the insurance company for those services paid for by the monthly fee and the patient does not have a adoptable. just the monthly fee. senator cantwell and i have the bill that would promote this. familiar with it but it sounds like it has potential. is whatwant to know percentage of health-care system will be affected by that? it could be effective for a large percentage of patients, but the large dollars are going into very sick patients needing specialty care. >> the way it works is you would still have catastrophic coverage on top. if i have a headache on friday afternoon, i don't go to the emergency room, i go to the doctor with whom i have a contract. it sounds like it has potential. i would be happy to look into it later. >> you mentioned the issue with prior authorization. a huge amount of waste fraud abuse. i like your concept of standardizing. but for you to suggest it is no

i'm the gsa administrator. thank you for the opportunity to testify today on gsa's role in the administration's government reform plan. specifically the reorganization of certain functions with respect to the office of personnel management. gsa's mission is to deliver value and savings in real estate acquisition, technology and other mission support services across government. in this testimony, i will lay out the case for why gsa is uniquely positioned to build on the work of opm and enhance the delivery of human capital operation services across government. as detailed in the president's reform plan, the consolidation of administrative support functions into a unified customer centric organization is a rational approach to management of any large organization. to that end, the plan identifies an expanded role for gsa, to provide administrative services to federal agencies. under the plan, gsa's role will expand most substantially through the move of certain human resource operational functions from opm to gsa

the bush administration and almost 90% less than under the obama administration. some of that appears to have been a decision made by the epa office of compliance and enforcement to seek headquarters's approval before beginning investigatory actions. i have the memo here, effective is required review prior to issuance of information request under the clean air act and the clean water act. i would like to ask that this memo be made an exhibit. sen. barrosso: without objection. sec. whitehouse: what is your intention regarding that headquarters review stymieing what had always been the differente of regional agencies in getting information about potential violations? mr. wheeler: i am actually not -- i have not seen that memo. is there a date? sec. whitehouse: this memo was dated may 31. mr. wheeler: this year or last year? sec. whitehouse: 2017, so it has been in place for a while. if you have to run the ability to ask an information request through headquarters, that gives them the chance to create institutional delay or put the kabul -- on an investigation -- kab

9 months of the bush administration with 35% compared to the first 9 months of the obama administration. in the same period epa thought 50% less in fines and money for environmental cleanup, then the bush administration and 90% less than under the obama administration. some of that appears to have been a decision made by the office of compliance and enforcement to seek headquarters approval before beginning investigatory action. i have the memo here, effective immediately, ecoa headquarters reviews required prior to issuance of information requests under the clean air act and clean water act. what is your intention regarding the headquarters reviews stymieing, regional agencies and getting information. >> i am not -- i haven't seen that memo. is there a date? >> this memo was dated may 31st. >> this your last year? >> it has been in place for a while. if you have to run the ability -- the information requested headquarters, gives headquarters the chance to create massive institutional delay or put the kibosh on an investigation from the very beginning. that doesn't seem like the right r

state under the administrative procedure act. froml pull one quote professor michael livermore. deadlock,ressional this has become the primary vehicle for progress over the last several decades. replacing kennedy with kavanaugh will make this more difficult. holding and fretless risk. i agree with that. started,ack to where i congress is not legislating. agencies are using still statutes that have not been updated in decades. to make major decisions that affect our everyday lives and justice kavanaugh will not give that a free pass. if the statute doesn't allow the regulars -- the agency to regulate, he will not let them regulate. in that sense, i do think some bythese concerns raised administrative law and environmental law professors -- there is some foundation to them. one of us wouldn't those as concerned though. some of us would think that congress should legislate and if there is an issue of major political or economic significance, congress should take the lead and sate yes, here are our instructions for how you deal with

the administration's concerned about it. but many some ways -- in some ways, i see this growing and mounting. there was a recent letter signed by the whole adele division, the -- iowa delegation calling the tariffs catastrophic for the state. senator thune of south dakota said that the tariffs have cost soybean producers in south dakota $250 million already. there is a ferment going on here. we've been tracking this in particular with, you know, i mentioned our new web site, and, you know, us organizations like to tack how they appear in the press. and we've gotten plenty of press coverage, but i think what's most striking is the local press coverage, the local cbs or fox news. they've all picked it up, and most -- the stories, there's a kind of sameness to the reporting of these local news stations where they cite the data, and then they turn to local farmer or local manufacturer that's feeling the pinch. i can tell you that this is growing in the congress, the concern is spreading, and it's also translating, i think, into

the reagan administration, clinton administration, bush in eachration, served of those, except the reaganruation or even the obama administration tried it in 2012, what hillary clinton called it, crippling sanctions. episode very similar where the iranian currency experienced a sharp depreciation with inflation in terms of percentage terms today, it was actually a sharp and depreciation back in 2012. seen it time that the government of iran not only survived each one of the tests the united states imposes on it but it in fact gets stronger internally with internal cohesion, and stronger in terms of the ability to project influence throughout the region. those in the trump administration who think they can really slam iran, i think theireed to look back at own records, many in the reagan administration when the efforts were tried and failed. >> we have seen massive protests in iran. could it make the difference? >> we have seen protests for many years. back in 2012, the most recent effort -- episode which looks similar to this one were president obama imposed crippling sanctions. we saw a

state under the administrative procedure act. i will pull one quote from professor michael livermore. giving congressional gridlock, this has become the primary vehicle for environmental progress over the past several decades. replacing kennedy with kavanaugh will make this more difficult. i agree with that. getting back to where i started, congress is not legislating. agencies are using statutes that have not been updated in decades to make major decisions that affect our everyday lives and justice kavanaugh will not give that a free pass. if the statute doesn't allow the agency to regulate, he will not let them regulate. he is going to say congress, you've got to pass legislation. in that sense, i do think some of these concerns raised by administrative law and environmental law professors -- there is some foundation to them. some of us wouldn't view those concerns. some of us would think that congress should legislate and if there is an issue of major political or economic significance, congress should take the lead and say ye

it hasn't really been a strong suit of the previous administration or the trump administration. we still need to have a much more integrated approach that brings an coming up secretary ross here, the department of defense. we still really need to figure out exactly how we are going to implement our own cybersecurity and then work with countries that there is a lot of trust with on that issue. i think with regard to india we have the potential there and you look at some of the other countries in the world but obviously with regard to to china for example the trust relationship on cybersecurity issues is about zero. we need to get our own house in order first and i think too many of our adversaries and potential adversaries have seen the u.s. as the world cyber punching bag. they have done a lot to attack us and we have not really made it a high price to pay for countries to do that and i think our retaliatory measures that we can take that happens, way to start it up to make sure that when countries attack us from that perspective they recognize there will be much higher costs. >

yet behind the scenes, the administration trying to water those down. the president issued a statement at the time saying that some of the provisions were unconstitutional. called it flawed seriously and criticized for slowly implementing these sanctions so they're facing a lot of pressure and new sanctions that have been proposed in the wake of his helsinki summit and the administration facing pressure of congress moving forward with more sanctions on russia. >> thank you very much. >>> joining us now, democratic senator hirano of hawaii. senator, thanks so much for joining us. let me get your thoughts right away on the new sanctions that the administration is imposing on russia for their involvement in the poisoning of this ex-spy and his daughter on british soil. do these sanctions send the right message? >> certainly does. but it's not as though the administration had a choice about imposing the sanctions because as noted there's a 1991 law that requires once the determination is made that a country has used chemical or biological weapons against pe

there is only 26 other administrative actions, investigations launched by administration. i'm not including the two that were launched by the ministration and they rarely are focused on the finished product automobiles. there was overwhelming opposition to this investigation. there's been about 2300 comments filed into the department of commerce packet and we've only been able to identify three organizations that are supported and i'd note that supported is somewhat measured and the hearing on july 19 there were 45 witnesses and only one uaw testified in support of and again, i note that their comments were measured because they understand the global nature of this industry and the supply chain we rely on and so they more targeted approach. so needless to say, overwhelming opposition. and that's because the consequences are significant. before i turn to the implications, i want to know that when this first came across our desk and we heard that this investigation was going to be launched, i think how can cars possibly be a threat to national security? it's a little absurd.

we don't have enough time to compare or to talk about the obama administration or even the bush administration or even the clinton administration, in terms of the steps they took to advance urban america. i have been on the scene, i was mayor of new orleans during the clinton and bush years. i was president of the urban league during the bush, obama, and trump years. if there was a window of opportunity where the trump administration could make a difference, it is in prison and criminal justice reform. i think there is a determination by many in his administration to put their markdown, but that does not take away from the rollback of civil rights titans is taking place at the justice department or department of education. those rollbacks have a long-term, deleterious effect on the body politic of the nation. nor does it take away from this charged up climate in the it isy of rhetoric and extremely divisive. i do not have enough time here to just go point by point with this particular pastor, but it was a great paid political advertisement. host: we are taking your calls , the ceo andial presi

the administration does not really see it that way. as this quote here from peter navarro says, he says it does us no good if we are just assembling things here, which i think is a misrepresentation of how global value chains work. we are not just assembling things, we are doing the highest value added elements. but there is a desire on the part of the administration to see whether we can pull those value chains back into the u.s. and the areas where they have gone overseas, such as wire harnesses, a specific example i know the administration has wondered about. the industry finds it a little confusing because, after all, what is the unemployment rate? 3.9% today? is having a terrible time finding workers to fill openings today, so the idea that we need to be doing more of most labor-intensive parts of production in the u.s. leaves companies scratching their heads. another perspective i want to share here is that sometimes there is a zero-sum game perspective on international trade. that unless the other guy is losing, we cannot be win

administration, or rather the trump administration. intentional or not, adopted a regime collapsed strategy. but there is no follow-up in terms of what comes after. it is one thing to say is up to iranians to determine their future, i think the united states is very invested now. because it is strangling iran's economy. if i iranians rise up and coming into the streets by the millions , it will be key what the united states will do and what kind of signals it sends. and what kind of policy. sanction, andg to the u.s. has done that very well , but it is a another to support opposition groups or decide, very solidly, whether washington is going to engage the regime, to enforce another deal. or whether, once and for all, they will figure out what to do. in tandem with the iranian people. thank you for that. i would like to thank c-span for being here today. that i heardesting today is that we are in a pretty revolutionary state. there is resentment towards the moderates. the regime is losing its social base. and he said it was conceptuall

to talk about administrative law, administrative law is the law that governs how federal agencies regulate us and how courts review those regulations. we live in an area -- era. to provide an impact -- imperfect snapshot of that, if period, at the 2016 federal agencies, gave rules that took up 60,000 pages in the federal register. during that period, congress passed laws taking up 3000 pages in the statutes of large. we live in an era where lawmaking by regulation predominates. it is exciting to see president trump nominate someone from the by. circuits, which is congressional design, a court that specializes in administrative law. i would not say the vast majority. that is an overstatement. it is the preeminent administrative law court we have in the united states. judge kavanaugh is one of the most sophisticated jurists in the federal judiciary when it comes to administrative law. this is a geek fest. this is more sophisticated and fun. my bottom line is if you were hoping for a deconstruction of the administrative state as steve bannon said during the campaign, you're going to be disapp

contrast all of that the current administration. when sessions became the attorney general, one of his first acts was to roll back and -- an obama policy which was attempting to fade out the use of private prisons by the federal government. sessions stopped that right away. he announced that he was going to increase the use of the federal death penalty. he reversed a policy of the prior administration that basically encouraged federal prosecutors not to prosecute federal marijuana laws in states that had made marijuana legal. he turned that back. he also, most significantly, directed all federal prosecutors to seek and charge the highest possible level of any offense. this was a direct change from what attorney general holder and his successor had done. why is that significant? because by choosing to charge at the highest level, it automatically meant mandatory minimums. judge donald: professor davice, on this last point, is it your contention that the current attorney general removed the discretion of u.s. attorneys or did he simpl

because this administration did create this policy, right? it's pretty ballsy to blame congress for it, when three people from your administration already said it was a trump team idea. this is--it's bs. it's like if beethoven said that beethoven's 5th was written by johann nepomuk hummel. first of all, beethoven, your name is in the title. okay? we know that. and second, we all know that hummel's work relied more heavily on the piano and on pressing the limits of modernity. don't even front on that shit, man! sorry. classical music. anyway... [cheers and applause] and like-- here's the thing. nielsen's deceptiveness doesn't even come close to the commander in chief. because like his space force, his lies are out of this world. - president trump falsely blaming democrats for his own policy. - i hate it. i hate the children being taken away. the democrats have to change their law. that's their law. they were forced-- [reporters clamoring] that-- [reporters clamoring] quiet. quiet. - why are you lying about it? - that's the democrats' law. we c

what is the administration's take on this u.n. report?t would the administration consider an overall victory against isis? >> we would like to see every single member of isis defeated across the globe. that would be the ultimate victory. john. >> reporter: closing arguments are taking place across the river in alexandria for the tax fraud trial of paul manafort. and in mid june the president said he felt badly for mr. manafort and that he believes he is being treated unfairly. is the president still friends with mr. manafort? when was the last time he spoke with mr. manafort? >> i am not aware of any recent conversations that they have had. blake. >> reporter: does he believe he is being treated unfairly? >> i think the president made that clear in his previous comments. blake. >> reporter: sarah, you just said that the increased tariff levels with turkey were out of the national security interests, but when the president announced it on twitter last week or earlier this month he said, quote, at the time, he said our relations with turkey

welcome administrative wheeler. i thought your tenure predecessor's tenure as a tawdry behavior in office and a desire to do damage to the agency that he led flagrant absence of transactional integrity and horrible governmental policies. i see you as a remedy to it. three of those four. in that sense, i welcome you. my visit to you i appreciated very much your courtesy and having me in and i hope that you follow through on putting teddy roosevelt's picture up on your wall and i think that would be a good reminder and a good signal. a lot of what needed to be repaired at epa to do with process stuff, rather than substantive disagreement you and i may have on of our mental issues. some of the process stuff has to do withir enforcement. in the first nine months of the top demonstration which we have data foror enforcement actions declined by 30% compared to the first nine months of the bush demonstration for more than 35% for the first nine months obama administration. in the same. epa has sought 50% less and find the

through participation in key forms, like the administration's defense trade focus administrative builds upon the policy and directs the u.s. government by strengthening advocacy for strength sales that are so critical to our national interests. the state department, through my bureau, has played a central role in the development of the c.a.t. policy and its implementation plan because arms transfers are and must be tools of our overall foreign-policy objective. through the responsible oversight of arms transfers, we are supporting existing allies and transfers or in some cases establishing and expanding new security partnerships that we hope will last for generations. the complexities of our operating environment are clearly manifest. the issues we tackle every day at state are at the confluence of policy, regulatory, economic, and congressional appearance. -- imperatives. as we endeavor to faithfully implement policy, we are anchoring our transfers and our larger foreign-policy framework and, simultaneously, protecting the security and integrity of the technological advantage and our i

just a contrast the current administration with the prior administration. when eric holder became attorney general in 2009, he started by giving a major speech on capitol hill that was sponsored by the congressional black caucus. at that speech, he announced that he was going to do a major overhaul on the charging practices and plea-bargaining practices of prosecutors and the department of justice. he was going to order the consideration of alternatives to incarceration and the reconsideration of all kinds of policies and practices. he announced that the disparity between crack powder and cocaine should be eliminated. he spoke against mandatory minimums. this was an extraordinary speech. i was at that speech. i had never heard and attorney general acknowledge that we have a problem with mass incarceration or racial disparity, much less pledged to change it. he proceeded to do what he could to change those practices and policies of the previous administration. at the aba annual meeting in san francisco in 2013, he gave a major speech. it was a couple years b

i think you and your administration. pres. trump: it is of the net should have been done a long time ago. i want to really thank you for the job you have done, really incredible. yout of people are saying, mean that is the trump administration that is doing this? they do not believe it. we are making a tremendous amount of progress. the community i am a part, thank you for your boldness. thank you for taking a stand for those that are disenfranchised. that in the city of chicago, there are so many are talking about revitalization, and i know that is in your hearts of rebuilding communities. i look forward to working with you and your administration to revitalize chicago. pres. trump: thank you. birmingham, alabama, and i just want to continue to underscore what has already been said. heart for allyour people but particularly your leadership and the issue of prison reform. those are two of the biggest issues facing alabama, a lot of the individuals -- that is the biggest issue. thank you. the compassion and care for all people.

carterred nixon, ford, and the reagan administration. he was then based in london and was nbc's chief foreign correspondent. he became chief white house correspondent under the presidency of george h w bush. in 1984. abc news from 2001-2011, he was the network senior washington correspondent and retired at that time. thate to give a shout out john cochran is a graduate of the university of alabama and a good friend. role tied, welcome john. [applause] my next guest is christie arsons. she is the senior editor at the atlantic and director of the talent lab. it's a position she has held since may? is that right? for the besting and brightest young journalists for the magazine. if you have students that christie needs to know, come see her. house ford the white the last on his list times for a decade and was political writer for the chicago tribune for many years before that. she is -- has recorded from many different countries and most notably for our conversation rise of she charted the barack obama from the illinois statehouse to the sen

by thisou can see this administration test contrasting this administration with the previous administration, if you have got an attempted dialogue with russia while you have sequestration under way, you are operating from a position of weakness. and while you are trying to go to nuclear zero your operating from a position of weakness. if you have a dialogue with the russian federation in the context of a strong national defense establishment where you have got a tremendous $700 billion increase underway in your recapitalized arsenal i think you are operating from a position of strength. sen. isakson: you are sending the right signal, no doubt about it, in my opinion. on talking about nuclear starts, on the new treaty, i was in the senate in 2010, mr. chairman, when we did the new star treaty. i think that treaty expires in 2021, is that correct? 2020? i think you were asked a minute ago by senator paul if the administration had taken a position yet on renegotiating the 2020 reauthorization of the new star treaty. have you? sec. mitchell: we have not. sen. isakson: have the russians engaged

this is one administration. process an interagency to everything you are asking about and we are on the same page. paul: think we have asked some really important questions. do sanctions change behavior? without the answer to that, i don't think we can decide whether or not we want more sanctions unless we see if they work. when therd to iran world has sanctions, there were obviously evidence that it works to bring them to the negotiation table. the question is do these sanctions work? one possibility is that they don't work. if they don't work, what is the result of sanctions? one result might be that it draws russia more into the sphere of china and drives countries such as turkey into this fear of either russia or china. i think there are arguments it to be made that perhaps more sanctions aren't the way to go. sanctions are sort of the stick. the question is what is the caret? that one of the carrots might be considering whether or not we continue to insist that ukraine and georgia be in nato. i think that i

he covered nixon, ford, carter, reagan, and the bush administrations. from 1978 to 1987, he was based in london and was the chief foreign correspondent for nbc. he returned to nbc's washington bureau and became chief white house correspondent under the presidency of george h.w. bush. cochran joined abc news in 1994 as chief capitol hill correspondent covering bob dole's unsuccessful bid for the president, and was senior white house correspondent in the final two years of the clinton administration. from 2001 until 2011, he was the network's senior washington correspondent and he retired at that time. and i have to give a "roll tide" shoutout. [laughter] jennifer: john cochran is a graduate of the university of alabama and good friend of the university of alabama, so roll tide, john. john: roll tide. jennifer: ok. welcome, john. [applause] john: thank you. jennifer: my next guest is christi parsons. christi parsons is the senior editor at the atlantic and director of the talents lab, a position she has held since may. is that right? christi: yes. jennife

it was tried by the clinton administration, the george w. bush administration.it wasn't until the obama team came aboard with secretary gates's support that export control reform happened. that is what it takes. the proposals we put forward to the white house were very detailed, 16 pages based on my experience and the experience of others. it does not mean that is the only way to get this done but it has to be a very specific, driven, solution driven, detailed written, on someone, to see it through. that is the only way we will see true transformation. contracting takes 300 days to make a major system on contract under an fms case. you have a contracting community and the pentagon that is decimated and grossly understaffed. they are overwhelmed with current fight supporting us forces and supporting allied forces in the current flight and fms comes along as a third priority which is why you have unprecedented use of contracting actions. that is an opportunity potentially with the administration to look at carving out the congress's support of unique federal acqui

bush administration.was not until the obama team came on board with secretary gates and direct intervention that export control happened. that is what it takes. the proposals we put forward to , the threeouse proposals, were detailed. 16 pages based on my experience and experience of others. that does not mean it is the only way to get this done. it has to be a very specific, driven solution, detailed event, rose pinned on someone to see it through that --. see is the only way we will true transformation. contracting -- it takes over 300 days to get a major system on contract under and at ms case. community contracting in the pentagon that is decimated and understaffed. with theoverwhelmed current fight supporting u.s. forces and supporting allied forces in the current fight and then fms comes along as a third priority for contracting. undefended ties contracting actions. that is an opportunity, potentially, to look at carving out, with congress support, unique federal acquisition procedures for fms contr

michael and joanna carter versus the zoning administrator. appealing the issuance on july 3rd, 2018 of the suspension request regarding building permit application -- applications. they were approved by the planning department on march 29th, 2010 to allow construction of a four-story, no basement single-family dwelling pursuant to variants issued on april 8th, 2010 regarding the front setback, rear yard and curb cut at the subject property. however, this permit was not issued until may 22nd, 2015. three years after the variance decision which rendered the variance decision void and cancelled. the planning department is requesting that the permit be suspended to allow the property owner time to submit a new variance application for the project. we will hear from the appellant. you have seven minutes. >> i need to make a disclosure. good evening. i wish to disclose that i am a partner in a project that was hired as an attorney. the appearance this evening will not have any effect on my decision. although i wish to disclose that although the dis

the trump administration wantsth to weakee rules that were a signature policy of the obama administration. what is your response? gina: what it really is is a gaveaway to foreign markets as well as the oil ansector. this is all about making sure that the oil industry continues seto make money at the expf american carmakers, the american -- at the expense of consumers, at the eense of our planet and health and well-being. but i want to assure you that i have read this rule and it doesn't follow the signs, follow science,t follow the follow the law. it is going to present years of challenge because they are questi national program that has benefits for everybody in this country as well as tlanet. laura: the trump administration is claiming that having cars which are very fuel-efficient will be unsafe because it will d lead to movers on the roadre and therefore rashes. what do you make of that? gina: it is a little bit of a ysffling argument because they can argue it both what you just said was that if you have the money to buy the fuel-efficient vehicles and drive them around more, but they

bush administration when they even considered regime change we saw it with the obama administration when in fact you know they took a fairly tough line to lead up to the two thousand and fifteen agreement but the huge difference here is is that. there was cooperation between those administrations and between partners such as the europeans and indeed between russia and china who were other parties to the agreement because you knew the rules you knew you could work with the state department you knew you could work with the national security council there was an element of trust here what has happened is that a combination of certain officials in washington such as the national security advisor john bolton who is committed to regime change and just the volatile nature of donald trump who has very little knowledge about the issue but just wanted to rip this up because barack obama did it means that the rules are gone you can't trust dealing with troponin on and again steve wants to make this into a fantasy where trump is like the leader of this coalition or i'd love a rainbow unicorn for chr

this administration has. so i think if we look at some of the economic fundamentals movement in the gdp, the sorts of foreign direct engagement, those will be very helpful for us to have and kind of map that to actions that you all have taken. you may not be able to drive direct causation, but that would be helpful to show. and i think we're seeing trends move in the right direction. i don't know if you have information you can provide with that or whether or not that would be provided publicly at some point. >> senator, we would be happy to provide that publicly. there's no, or to you personally, there's no question to see the kind of trim lines. there's no question that the sanctions are -- or the fact that we have actually gone after some of these very significant entities, oligarchs -- >> i would like to hit that, because i would like to drill it down so that when you hear no action is being taken, no repercussions are being experienced, that seems to suggest or to defy any logic with anybody that follows

es>> who pays for this rec action by the trump administration? d at the pump, and with our health. >> woodruff: automakers aou concerned abhaving two different standards. in a statement, the alliance of automobile manufacturers said, "we urge california and the federal government to find a commonsense solution." one of the states that has said it will go to court ginia. mark herring is the state's attorney general, and he is in chmond. attorney general herring, thank you very much for j us. the trump administration says what it's doing will help the american economy. it says, as you heard, the obama er standards were going to cost consumers more per car. >> no, that's nonsense. judy, the trumpadministration, time and again, has shown an incredible capacity to follow really bad public polcy and oftentimes do it in an illegal way. and what they've announced toda isnfortunately another example. climate change is real, and here in virginia, we see the effects of that with more severe weather. in hampton roads in southeastern virginia, they deal with

day 561 this was of the trump administration.interest in one of donald trump's veteran advisers.

plants but any radically different way than the obama administration did, where the obama administrations expansive program where states were encouraged to shut down coal plants and use more natural gas. the trump administration proposal today would have the epa laying out in missions controls that they would like to see you -- admissions -- emission controls that they would like to see. they will leave the states the specific plans on how individual facilities can reduce pollution. so they will set the benchmark broadly in terms of what is technologically feasible, but give states lots of leeway in deciding what should be done at individual plants. and it may actually differ from plant to plant, even in individual states. david: if this goes through tomorrow, which it won't, but would it make coal cheaper the natural gas? jennifer: that is a tough russian dancer. the administer -- tough question to answer. proposals,of those both of those models rather, uptick, asmodest toh as 4.8% or 5% tied relatively low power prices. in a high price environment, some of those benefits would disappea

>> well, we have a bipolar administration. we have a president saying one thing and his administration saying another. it's important they did what they did. it's also important for the president to stop undercutting that message and sending signals to moscow that the back door is going to be open. >> do you think we can safeguard the country well enough with this bipolar existence? >> i think it puts us in jeopardy. i have confidence in people standing on that platform. i think they were serious people. they've been attacked by this president as well. but when the president speaks, people listen and vladimir putin listens as well. we need to be -- we need to move forward as one. and it's concerning and bewildering that this president is willing to undercut these folks on what is a major, major concern for our democracy. >> david axelrod, thank you very much. have a wonderful weekend. >> have a great weekend, you guys. >> it's been wonderful to work with you. have a fantastic week end. >> thank you. cnn newsroom with erica hil