often when congress was in recess. members of congress then lived far from the capital, many days and weeks away over muddy and treacherous, dangerous and sometimes impassable dirt road. washington faced crises and the framers of the constitution have been foreseen and he had to act on his own to protect the nation and its citizens. obviously not every president has made of the same stuff as washington. i will not name names, but weaker and indecisive president and without washington's leadership, qualities have often let her powers slip away sometimes to congress, sometimes to the supreme court, sometimes into thin air just letting the nation drift because they don't know how to steer the shape of the state. they say one thing one day and the opposite for next and it just drifts. president carter admitted in the nation during his administration it was drifting into the sea of malaise. washington knew how to use here are the shape of the state. most americans today think that he only faced a crisis during the revolutio

i will say he comes to congress to get statutory authority for congress and iraq.i think that serious was a great national debate. the constitution doesn't belong just into three branches. this is a popular government in the bear was this strong word from the american public don't do this. >> may bmaybe that indicates regardless what the president said with his public opposition into the chance to assert the authority this is on the national constitution center up to the moment technologically into the question is how can we clarify facts to make it difficult especially because in the context of the war on terror what does that mean? and i think what is problematic and dangerous about that is very as an argument to be made for the president having power during the crisis when there is an emergency and there isn't an opportunity like with lincoln. if you have an ongoing emergency and it's the president needs to enhance the power it's not an emergency anymore that is just the normal state of affairs and that is dangerous for the constitutional system and the nation a

congress will pass, congress will raise the debt ceiling. it's the only thing i'm really certain of and so the administration does not have to negotiate because it's not in a negotiation. there is nothing to negotiate. congress will pass the debt ceiling and it's true that the stakes aren't as high as this congress has taken up in recent years but i will tell you every one of those negotiations that we had to do with congress the vast majority of them are not on a serious issue. they were not. a member of congress wanted someone to be on a board or a commission. another member of congress wanted to get a promise that you know we would agree to send someone up for a hearing on cuba policy. completely unrelated things. it would be great if we could have real debate and discussion on long-term entitlement programs. i think everyone here would agree that would be a really useful event if we could have that negotiation in that discussion on the big issues of the day on tax and spending and long-term obligations but that is not what this doubles a

that's what congress should do. i want to point out that speaker boehner, unlike many of his allies on the right, is at least shooting straight. when he said that. the specific in the president has done for which he is being criticized are, in fact, lawful. host: one other quotation from federalist 521- this is from james madison. guest: yes, the reliance on the people is our ultimate protection. the people must also be informed which is why it's a good thing we have c-span. they also must be alerted in these matters and, regrettably today, our education system does not teach the kind of basic civics that is necessary to be an informed and knowledgeable citizen about our system of government. with respect to the point that sy just made relating to speaker banner plus comments, he spoke about the minimum wage for government contractors but he did not speak about the accounts. ira accounts.he those accounts are apparently to be done through executive order. it seems to me that that will present a problem. these are go

with congress, or on my own. i've got a pen and i've got a phone and i can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions, administrative actions that move the ball forward. now, i'm going to be working with congress where i can to accomplish this. but i'm also going to act on my own if congress is dead locked. i have a pen to take executive actions where congress wouldn't. and i've got a telephone to rally folks around the country on this mission. where congress is not acting i'll act on my own. i've got a pen and i've got a phone and that is all i need. so wherever and whenever i can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more american families that is what i'm going to do. >> wow, so you get the point. president obama made good on that pledge when he recently re-wrote the obamacare law designed to affect the key mandate. critics argue he did it to help the democrats avoid paying a bigger political price in the 2014 mid-terms. but motive doesn't really matter. a deadline was

but congress gave bush everything he wanted. wouldn't it have been more pracical for the executive order from the beginning? >> congressional approval is welcome, but not necessary is what one author wrote. they said when it comes to using military force, these decisions are for the president alone to make. congress and the courts cannot restrain the executive. if congress passes a law that the president deems not president he can set it aside. maybe you will seek congressional approval, but whenever possible, lawyers in the bush administration tried to argue they preserved this power. jeff mentioned several case and the supreme court rejected the idea that the president has absolute or inherit power to set aside laws and not be constrained by the constitution. when the supreme court won a case in 2004, the bush administration's response was -- they misread the opinion and said we are glad the court represented the president. o'connor said a war isn't a blank check for the president. checks and balances apply. but whatever possi

with congress, or on my own. i've got a pen and i've got a phone and i can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions, administrative actions that move the ball forward. now, i'm going to be working with congress where i can to accomplish this. but i'm also going to act on my own if congress is dead locked. i have a pen to take executive actions where congress wouldn't. and i've got a telephone to rally folks around the country on this mission. where congress is not acting i'll act on my own. i've got a pen and i've got a phone and that is all i need. so wherever and whenever i can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more american families that is what i'm going to do. >> wow, so you get the point. president obama made good on that pledge when he recently re-wrote the obamacare law designed to affect the key mandate. critics argue he did it to help the democrats avoid paying a bigger political price in the 2014 mid-terms. but motive doesn't really matter. a deadline was

congress all legislative powers. forget the politics for a moment, congressman becerra, i would think as a congressman you would be upset at the idea of any president, and you're right, there are other presidents of the other party who have done it, any president going around congress to this extent. >> if you were going around congress to rewrite law, that would be different than trying to use the flexibility you're given by the congress to execute the law. the president is not trying to rewrite and never said i'm going it alone, the president said i'm going to work with congress, but where congress decides not to act, remember, this is perhaps the greatest do-nothing congress we have seen. we have a republican speaker who said he will not -- he will be the brick wall that will not permit the president to act. so the president is trying to implement the law. >> when the health care law says the employer mandate shall begin after december 31st, 2013, isn't that pretty specific? >> it will begin after december 2013. t

since i mentioned to congress. >> i love congress. [laughter] >> good start. >> i do.obody believes me. >> you will get a lot of opportunity to do that. [laughter] >> the other day i was on the hill i said let's do some , drive-bys. let's stop often see friends of mine. are you sure? don't we make appointments? we can do that. i just stop and say happy new year. i caught a number of important members of congress by surprise. it is relationship building. a lot of members of congress, i know and respect. >> i'm pleased to hear you say that. when michael chertoff was the secretary, he would routinely invite me as the chairman of a subcommittee down here for breakfast. we would talk about issues. we formed a professional relationship which just developed into a friendship. those relationships matter. i know you are having fun. it is a fact that of 100 committees and subcommittees of the united states congress, this is not an exaggeration, have some piece of the homeland security mission. i think of is on the national journal cover, it looks like a where's waldo picture. it

congress can do this. congress has the power to create to get yourction client the relief they seek. they have not done it. >> two responses, your honor. amst, the people i representing have been harmed by past action. even if congress decides to create a new cause of action, it will not help the people harmed inthis executive branch action. the supreme court itself, in the context of deciding whether or not there should be a bivens cause of action where military members were harmed said very essentially as is policy judgment. there is no scientific demonstration of the right answer. you are writing on a blank slate with this particular problem. can stopt think you your analysis at that point. you have to go on with the supreme court case. >> they said in the stanley case, they argued that it was limited to the facts and obviously stanley is upholding as well. what we argue is those cases are ever to be distinguished by looking at it as to whether or not the context -- whether or not the activity at issue

when congress can't pass bills, when congress shuts down the government, the president can't just sithere. what he is saying is wait. >> that is the way the constitution is written. >> he's just supposed to sit there? he is just supposed to sit there? >> if you have an emergency with obama care. >> but you never know if something might happen if we just sort of talk about a foreign threat here, sir. >> i would hope we never have a chief executive who would at which time will his thumbs because congress can't work. >> we have two story. if you look at the first five years of the recent two-term presidents we have a graph on the screen, obama, in fact, has used executive orders much less often than his predecessors going back to reagan. and this is the question that congressman basara raised, i think it's a legitimate question for you, sir, if there's a member of congress you feel the president is doing something unconstitutional, you said that, violating the constitution, why don't you take them to court? >> okay. first of all, i said taking him to court. there are many instances in wh

and says, you know, congress is -- really takes congress to make a big sweeping difference here. i think in the messaging the smallness of those initiatives is really important to them. gwen: except that congress initially responded very well. part of the advance message was that he was going to use his pen and his phone to get things done. wasn't certain about the phone part but i do know members of congress were not crazy about the idea that he was going to use the pen and just by fiat, by signature override them. >> no. that's right. john boehner before the state of the union told reporters that if the president thought he could go around congress and all these major issues he was going to run into a "brick wall." although i think it's -- the state of the union, when the preemptive message was that it was going to be a finger wag to congress but came up with a much more cooperative message. i talked to members after the speech that actually even republicans who said they do think there's room to move forward on some substantive issues even though it's an election year. immigra

i think the fear that most members of congress have -- i think the fear that most members of congress have is not the other party, but being taken out in a primary. that is very difficult. i have watched leadership struggle this year was trying to get something done. it is just very difficult. i don't really know the answer to that. one way would be to fix campaign-finance reform again, but because of what is happening -- i mean, i was being a little facetious when i said it, but really, the only bill that passed last year was the national defense authorization act. early this year, we did get budget and we did get -- well, we got the budget passed last year at the end of the year. that was big. at the makeup the spending bill passed this year. we have the farming bill this year. maybe there is caused to be a little more optimistic that it will be a better year. we already have our budget number to work on is here. the appropriators will be working and i think they want to get back into the game. they have been relevant in the last few years because everyone is just waiting until the

maybe the president was really talking about, he was going to agree and going to ask congress if congress would actually change the law. maybe he thought he was going to have kathleen sebelius publish a different rule that would go out for comment and once it followed the administrative procedures, if it fit within the language of the obamacare legislation, maybe, maybe, maybe, mr. speaker, maybe -- maybe we could give the president the benefit of the doubt. but trust, but verify. so i went back and checked the rule. the rule that had been published that compeled the religious organizations to follow the path of all of the others to provide r sterilizations and contraceptives and the president was going to make an accommodation to the religious organizations and require that these be provided for free by the insurance companies and you would think there would have been a proposal for an amendment -- a bill to amend obamacare in congress. you would think there would be a change in the rules. mr. speaker, nothing changed in the rule. there wasn't an i dotted differently or a t crossed diffe

congress. it wasn't created by hearings, it wasn't created by a bill through congress. it was created by a top secret memorandum signed by harry truman in 1952 that was -- even the congress wasn't allowed to know about it. so it was, it's the only agency in the u.s. government that was born secret. >> yeah. which is, of course, the opposite of our postulates, that government must be transparent in order to have government by the consent of the governed. but it seemed apart to me that -- apparent to me other than a few cameo appearances nothing in your presentation involved congress. we have the whistleblowers, but where's congress? article i -- >> at least not until 1975. >> yeah. and that was just sort of an episodic instance in any event. we're talking about, as john henry said, the constitution of the united states. article i, section 6 specifically endows all members with what's called speech or debate immunity. it was exercised in the pentagon papers, 47 classified volumes of the pentagon

america is polarized and so is congress. i don't mean it isn't having problems of operation, which you know, suggests dysfunctionality. i am optimistic about moving forward and if we keep staying engaged and reach out to americans we will work out of the polarization. >> host: you travelled as member of congress extensively and wrote about that in the book. these congressional trips are used as fact-finding missions. and you write about doing some of that. but you have been seen as an ambassador and folks in foreign lands can relate to you. how does that feel when you go over and you are looking for information but people are coming to you and asking you how can america help us and what can you personal do about it? >> guest: there is pressure. but it is an honor to make friends for your koupt country. a lot of people hear about the united states, see it on television, but how much do they know about it? in some cases they know a lot. in some cases they don't know a lot or misperceive how the country works. if you are from a

the behavior in congress. and if you love this country, and you believe it has greater things to do, i think there are things in the book that will resinate with you. i wrote it and i think in a readable fashion that i hope people enjoy >> thank you, congressman. >> thank you, sir.

and congresses alone.use only congress has the power to extend the nation's borrowing authority. no congress in history has ever failed to meet this responsibility. still some in congress have suggested extending the borrowing authority should be tied to spending cuts but as one republican member of congress put it and i quote the time to fight for spending cuts is when you are talking about spending, not at debt ceiling time". the point is as i've noted before raising the debt limit has nothing to do with new spending. it's about fulfilling spending obligations that congress has already made in and paying the bills that have already been it incurred. refusing to raise the debt ceiling will not make these obligations are bill suddenly vanish. the president has made it clear time and again that neither he nor any other president should have to pay a ransom to the united states to pay its bills. presidents from both political parties have i stood firm on the importance of protecting the full faith and credit

by congress. operations inying asia and europe during the second world war. it was led by general donovan who received the medal of honor for his heroics during world war i. marco rubio is addressing a growing opportunity gap between people with and without advanced educations. he is: for alternatives to four-year colleges and income-based repayment for college loans. he says congress should establish an independent agency to assess free courses offered over the internet as a transferable credits. he senate meets they at 2:00 p.m. eastern and the house in at noon. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >> c-span. we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings, and conferences, and offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a public service of private industry. we're c-span, created by the cable tv industry 35 years ago and funded by your local cable or satelli

with congress.nd we did. we've been waiting a while for congress to act on climate. fair enough. multiple reasons why they haven't. but in the meantime, we will take action because 51% of the landmass of the united states is a lot of land. it's over 1.2 billion acres of land to be exact. and it's important to be really focused on vacation or our farmers and those who ranch and those who have forests are given every tool to be able to respond to adverse weather, which we are seeing. and there is a negative economic impact if we don't do this. i don't think it's a conflict at all. if we're trying to work with congress we can, if we can't we won't. if they won't we will continue to act. that's what i think the american public wants us to do. >> what legislative action in particular do you think would be helpful here? >> well, i'm just going, you know, i don't know all of my sister agencies wish list but i will tell you this but one thing i would like to see is work on infrastructure. our ability to res

any opposition from congress? frome have heard a lot defense hawks and that for 50 number is the one that scares them. that is not enough staffing and not enough people if we get into a major conflict. the pentagon has countered they need -- people cost money and they cannot afford to keep that nine--- ae on on a non-wartime footing. some talking about significant cuts to the marine corps. we will see fights on just about everything as he gets up to the hill. >> have we seen plans similar to this before like with donald rumsfeld prior to 9/11? rex i am not sure about that and what was being proposed. 9/11 changed everything overnight. we did see secretary gates and secretary panetta push these specific proposals with tri-care fees with some of the benefit rollbacks. they were met with mixed success. it is very easy for congress to give out extra money when it looks like they are being magnanimous when it comes time to pay for it and it becomes tougher for everyone. >> what happens with the budget proposal from her

how many years in your life did you spend working for congress?> i spent 28 years in congress as a staff member, first as a personal staffer for congressman john kasich. then as a staffer for the budget committee, the house budget committee when he was chairman. i was the analyst for national security affairs. in 2005, i moved on to the senate and work at the budget committee there in the same capacity. >> what do you think of that statement? up close it is truly ugly. >> it generally is. i would want to temper that. it has been a long time have it habit of everyone to criticize congress because they think that resonates with the public. it truly has become to some degree a horror show because of the increased partisanship and polarization. however, it is an institution by the firstb list article in the constitution. if we don't nurture it, if good people do not go there, if good staffers do not go there, what tag orl have is the reichs one of those chamber of the utes situations in the french third republic. i don't want that. i won young people

the president will work with the congress, where the congress is interested and willing to work with to wait. this department of education is implementing important education reforms because we need to make sure our students are succeeding and ready for careers, ready for college when they graduate from high school. so this president and this secretary of education is doing absolutely everything that they can do within the constraints of existing law because our kids are too important. >> but it sounds then like do you even need it? >> the reauthorization? >> yeah. >> sure. if congress acts, it gives us a lot more tools that we can use to spur these reforms even more quickly, even more thoroughly. it's very important we use every tool we've got while congress has this conversation. and that's what this president and this secretary of education are committed to doing. >> fighting the sounds of the motorcade behind you. welcome it my world when i'm out there. thank you for dealing with the cold. i appreciate it. >> thank you. >>> up next, is the obama administration divided over what t

and our lawmakers overstaying their welcome in congress one politician says they are and he's pushing for a bill that would limit how long congressman can stay in the game we'll take a look at that and more in the show. it's friday february seventh five pm in washington d.c. i'm lynn neary david and you're watching our team america and we begin today with the commencement of the twenty four thousand sochi winter olympics opening ceremonies just wrapped up not too long ago in addition to the athletes a russian history sequence was on display called welcome to sochi which featured over three thousand performers and recreations of classic russian fairytales but for more on that let's go to our poll scott. they decided to turn the attention to what russia has given the world in terms of the arts and culture over the years and focused on in particular literature and the tall story novel anna karenina they were boring dances of a giant train suspended from the ceiling now the spectacle is still ongoing is going to climax without a limp it talks being late and with a spectacular fireworks di

of this congress. the affordable care act has given us higher costs, not lower, it has performed much worse than was promised. much worse. and it will insent our citizens to work less. that's not what we want. that's really not what they want. mr. speaker, it is time for the administration to give in, to give in to reality and let us repeal this bill. it's the first choice, to just sit back and see it collapse under its own weight. you hear that expression a lot. i think that very well could happen. but let's be -- let's take maybe a more responsible approach, mr. speaker, i would say to this, to the president, mr. president, let's take a more responsible approach and you work with the congress, with republicans and democrats, with the house and the senate, you get more engaged than you've ever been before and work with us, let's repeal it. let's repeal it and let's start over with something that truly does work, because we all agree that while we have the greatest health care on the face of this earth

congress doesn't seem ready to get rid of the sequester. so both sides of this fight are blaming the other for being too reckless and cutting defense too much and they're both arguing that defense ought to have more. i'm worried we just started a process that looks like it's starting with cuts but really it's all about people competing to add as much as they can to the budget. >> again, i would say the see sequester baseline was never really realistic. what i'm afraid of is congress will outbid the secretary unless the american people step in and say, no, you don't intervene to protect the national guard size. and, you know, i think that's, by the way, what you talked about before about not increasing the size of the overall military before the wars. i think parent of that was a much greater use of the national guard overseas. there was a much greater deployment of the national guard in foreign wars, in some cases leaving them inadequately staffed to do some of the things they're supposed to do at home in times of disasters. but i -- the ke

what would i tell congress?t's pretty much useless to tell anyone in the government because they listen to the money, not the little people. much, tommy for a from augusta, georgia, good morning. caller: how are you doing? taxedk the nfl should be and big corporations and all the rich people like mitt romney. it started with ronald reagan. host: thanks very much for the call. next is riverton, wyoming, and the issue of the nfl and tax exempt status. caller: good morning, how are you? thank you for c-span. i believe that everyone should and ied including the nfl think we are just stupid not to do the right thing and tax them. thank you. host: thanks for the call. the front page of "the washington post," a look at 2016 and republican options are wide open with 15 or more essential candidates. mary is joining is joining us from mississippi, welcome to the program. caller: good morning. this is grossly unfair. this is just another example of big business who should pay their fair share. if you ask me, the whole tax

since i mentioned congress, let's talk about congress. >> i love congress.[laughter] >> good start. >> i do. nobody believes me. -- you'llget not bird get a lot of opportunity to do that. was on ther day i hill. i said let's do some drive-bys. let's stop often see friends of mine. >> are you sure? >> do make appointments? we can do that. i just stop and say happy new year. it is relationship building. that iers of congress know and respect. >> i'm pleased to hear you say that. chertoff was the director, he would routinely invite me as the chairman of a subcommittee down here for breakfast. we would talk about issues. we formed a professional relationship which just developed into a friendship. i know you are having fun. it is a fact of that 100 committees and subcommittees of the united states congress, this is not an exaggeration. they have some piece of the homeland security mission. i think of is on the national journal cover and look like a where's waldo picture. it showed all the different jurisdictions. the 9/11 commission was a member of that recommen

we have to get congress to raise the minimum wage. and it will issue the executive order to help people that work for federal contractors. and that is great. but it will only help about 250,000 people that will make a meaningful difference in their lives. but the minimum wage can help. and that would help millions of people. so that is the goal. we have to convince them that if we do it together and both sides get credit. and i would hope that they would go to the republicans and tell them if we raise the minimum wage that the folks that we said we'll have more money to buy the pizza. and you can raise the minimum wage and talk about the profitability. and i think that is the main goal. the other goal is that we have to be careful to not enter into these trade deals that just talk about offshore american jobs. and what else do we have to do? we have to talk about collective bargaining and continue to make the case that americans of all colors and faith are ultimately all american and that is what many have thought for and that is what

congress and part of -- for part of that course i have the students play a member of congress and they try to get a bill en, ad through the house of representatives, and that's a great experience for the students and for myself. if for no other reason than at the end i get to play speaker to i have a little gavel i get to use, and then i also teach a course called power in american politics, where we learn about different aspects of power in the united states, power of interest groups, power of congress, power of the president, power of the people, power of voters. so those are the class is teach here at catholic. >> why don't speakers traditionally vote on legislation? >> guest: speakers traditionally do not vote because it's a legacy of this hybrid position of speaker, as i mentioned before. they're seen as both a partisan leader and nonpartisan leader, and if you're nonpartisan its means you're not supposed to be taking part in the issues of the day that put you on one side of the question or the other. and to the extent that speaker is supposed to be presides over the house and ens

when i am running for congress, my religion is an issue. i had my pray leader come to the state legislator to offer opening prayer as we do in congress every day from different denominations and faith. i had been fasting for rom dawn. everybody knew i was a muslim. it was in the paper. but i think the reason it got such an interest is because in congress there is a specific role in terms of foreign policy, national security, war and peace. so many areas of the world where the united states was addressing an environment that was unstable had to do with a majority of muslim countries. in congress, a plot to attack the united states was hatched in afghanistan. we were in the midst of war in eve iraq, which i opposed. so i think those made it different. someone said, keith it is like if a japanese person ran for congress a few years after pearl harb harbor. you might imagine people wouldn't see you as the person, but as a member of the group. i think that is why people got excited, afraid and even abusive at some points. >> you mention your inv

then get congress to exceed? >> well, he's lost leverage, so he doesn't really have a lot of choice. the healthcare law rollout was really such a big disaster, but he's not in position to try to force congress to do anything and use pressure that way. so he's got executive order as an option. but even those ideas, like pat said, small ball. even the minimum wage increase he's proposing for federal workers is only going to touch a fraction of people. most already make above that level because of other laws in federal government hiring. it's not going to do anything for the rest of the population. job training. that's something the republicans have already put on the table in congress. democrats have rejected. some of these other initiatives really are small ball. notice immigration reform. he said very little, because he knows the republicans are already working on that. that truly, as eleanor said, would probably be his biggest victory if anything like that is accomplished this year. otherwise, i think you are ri

and overseen by congress what more could be done?obody is disputing these agencies failed to tell congress what they we're doing. >> above the need now is probable cause. going through sulfone records your e-mail reid the probable cause that every american in the country. >> she hit the nail on the head. basically the way this is wrapping up. lou: from september 1 through today we now have the federal government, congress suing the very people who have been protecting us against radical islamist terrorism over the past 13 years? it is about reality. >> today with the inter the federal courthouse a and the guards to although the you should see what they do. take off my belt, the issues , i cannot bring might ipad. there is a black-and-white digest's think we have gone a little too far. i will change my tune if god forbid another accident happens. lou: god bless you for being on this. most americans if one needed to ochered it would have to be a large event they would charge to the front of the blind to say what in the hell was the gov

we have whistleblowers but where's congress? article i -- >> at least not since 1975. >> that was just sort of in episodic instance anything. we're talking about the constitution of the united states. article one, section six specifically endows all members with what's called speech or debate them into. it was exercise in the pentagon papers. he was invested for espionage act by the nixon administration spent i think i know where you're going. all right head spin in any event, the reason for these observations are, you can't depend upon our liberties that some brave whistleblowers from time to time will expose the wrongdoing of the executive branch. it needs to be institutionalized which is the whole reason why you have congressional oversight in the speech and debate clause. until that's a change we make it had snowed in from time to time and it is going to change the dynamic of us there's a systematic insistence by the american people and congress that has been made public. i don't see any of that generation. you ask for anoth

is it the courts role to help congress balance power. when congress sues itself. the house sue the senate over the filibuster. was about this big of an item in "the new york times." suit is now on appeal. the house sue the senate, saying the filibuster is unconstitutional, it is outside the constitution's text. their argument is that the anstitution wants supermajority, it tells you to ratify a treaty. if there is no supermajority, why would the senate think i can create this permanent barrier. let's get to the punchline, do you think courts want these cases? do they want to tell a president he is against the constitution? do they want to tell the senate how to do business? this is why i am having a problem getting this book off the ground. how do i argue the court has a place when the court does not want a place. if congress is timid and deferential and the president is aggressive and robust in his orientation to his office, i don't mean this president, necessarily. is uncomfortable with these questions, where does that leave us? an uncomfortable institution, a t

for the with the 30th congress. with the energy bill that they have tried to bring it up it keeps getting blocked. anything with energy efficiency this year? >> if i was asked on the specific bill that would not be an active legislative congress the president and the senate disagree with the house on most issues. so any kind of major energy initiative i think we can debate it put things down and develop but from the republican point of view i think we prefer to wait and hopefully see the senate become republican in november then do something 2015. >> host: you have a similar dynamic with the bush and administration working with the republican president 2007. >> dote credit be i voted against that as often as i could have fought that with every fiber of my body. i will take credit with the 2005 but not the 2007. >> host: but i am going with that it is they ripen fire meant. >> it is it is for the current environment. >> but what about energy efficiency? we should be able to agree on that bipartisan basis. it is the l

congress. and it's important that people know that this is just a vote to make sure congress pays the bills for votes that's already taken. >> agreed to a month ago. >> these are the existing obligations of the united states government. >> so will you say definitively now, if there's a republican president, you will never use the debt ceiling as a -- >> i won't. i think the last couple of years have demonstrated it is irupon. >> and the democrats, who have done it before, they've done it, too, they won't -- >> i can only speak for myself, chuck. i can't bind my colleagues. but i do think that it's important we not play politics with this important issue. >> you heard, and some have done it in tongue in cheek, if you're not going to use it as a political tool, then surrender the whole control over the eye do that congress should be regulating it. should congress just simply not be involved in this anymore? should we get rid of the debt ceiling that was sort of created by congress? >> well, i'm i

congress is in this week. the senate is in all week. the house is in until wednesday because the democrats have their annual issues retreat so they'll adjourn on wednesday. that's just three days. there's no deal yet. we're going to be all paying very close attention to how house republicans because they run the house. not the democrats and they need to come up with a plan to agree amongst themselves on how to raise the debt ceiling and then take up legislation on that. once they pass it out of the house, the senate will need to decide whether they agree with that or not, it's by the democrats. you will have a tricky negotiation there. after that, the president can sign it. so the debt limit is the big issue on capitol hill this week. it's not expected that the house will come up with a solution by the end of this week. that leaves them with very little time because they're not going to be in session again until february 25 which is just two days before that deadline. the dominating story line in congress will be the debt ceiling. there