so you know it's not that he doesn't want to come to congress he is coming to congress today. it's an act of strength rather than an act of weakness he's saying to the country it's time to focus on this and understand it's an important step. not everyone has to agree with every way in which i have designed the request for authority. isle going to be the commoneder in chief. i'll make decisions after the authorisation votes or amends or changes. i'll do that to pursue the objective against people. he'll never give up the commander in chief power or the obligation to protect the american people. what he has, it's a good thing to do. sign on to this. let's talk about it. this will be a national effort you'll be part of it. >> thanks for coming by. >> we'll be back in a moment with more "inside story". when we return we'll continue our look inside the power to make war. the president asked congress for an authorisation to use military forwards against i.s.i.l. why do that when the united states has flown 2,000 air strikes against the so-called islamic state. stay with us. it's "in

the new congress had no revenue. there was no point confronting congress. it was the states that had the revenue. they chose saturday because congress never met on a saturday but the executive council of pennsylvania did. they surrounded the statehouse. alexander hamilton, chairman of the congressional committee to deal with this mutiny that had been going on for five days, got the president of congress to call a special session. the congressmen went into the building because hamilton and the congress wanted it to appear this was a demonstration against the united states of america. this was the horror of republics, the military rising against civilian control. and that the american people seeing this would come to the defense of congress. even though congress did not get a quorum, congress was not surrounded by district, nonetheless a representative went to the supreme executive council and asked the president the governor of pennsylvania the great john dickinson to call up philadelphia militia to drive the continental soldiers away from the building. dick

if it's going to be fixed it has to be fixed by congress and congress alone. i think the framers would be rolling over in their graves if they knew what this president was doing. and let me just address prosecutorial discretion for a moment, if i may. one of the hypotheticals that says sheriff for example, can decide that he's only going to pull over speeders who go five miles per hour or more over the speed limit and let everybody else go, and that's what this president is doing. there's no difference. there's a world of difference between those two things. what that president is doing in that hypothetical is prosecutorial discretion. but that's not what president obama is doing by these actions. to be analogous what president obama is doing here, that sheriff would have to first of all publicly pronounce to the world that he's not going to pull over the speeders despite the fact that law says they're speeders. he would have to say -- and if i do pull anybody over, i'm only going to give them a fine of a dollar even though the statute says that it's $100 or m

what was congress thinking here? congress' plan was pretty straightforward.by encouraging close and fluid interaction between lancaster's inhabitants and british prisoners, congress apparently hoped to nurture kindred relations between the combatants and... -- elicit the british captives' sympathy for their cause. congress ordered their captive officers relocated to neighboring towns. now the officers are being formerly -- formally separated from their men. congress had the british officers sign paroles which print -- prohibited parolees from straying more than six miles from their designated residence and from engaging in any correspondence concerning the dispute between great britain and its rebelling colonies. these british officers' paroles were in keeping with long-standing convention. the enlargement of these fish and liston says, that was another story. that was another story. by the standards of the day and certainly when contrasted with british resin or policy enlargement proved a remarkably liberal, even indulgent policy. it allowed these british ra

the congress --congress has not acquiesced. justice department claims that for previous sentences justify this. these claims are demonstrably false. in 1997, deferred action was granted under the violence against women act. it had artie been approved, but it was not available. it served as a temporary bridge -- second, in 2001, deferred action was granted for aliens under the trafficking laws. lawful status was immediately available on the other side. third, in 2005, action was granted to foreign students who lost their the says following hurricane katrina. to enroll another college to gain success. in 2009, deferred action was granted to aliens widowed before the two-year. . where visa petitions have been filed. historically, deferred action acts as a temporary bridge -- from one to another. benefits arriving host deferred action. deferred action services serves as a tunnel, there is no visa -- no pot of gold on the other side of the rainbow. my second point is that it violates the duty to take care of the law. article two --

why would the joint committee on the library of congress, something created by congress to make sure the congressional library have books and resources it needed to inform the legislative process, why would that could oversight of the collection of plants? there are two answers. one is that in 1850, there is no national parks service. there is not even a department of agriculture yet. there are very few executive branch agencies. the executive branch agencies that we might think of the natural homes for botanical gardens do not exist yet. secondly, the -- congress and the founding fathers may have considered plants informational resources similarly to the way they considered books and maps and those kinds of printed resources that were the domain of the library of congress. as such, as a collection of artifacts whose knowledge and information or potentially within whose knowledge and information could bring about better governance or economic possibilities, a collection of plants was not dissimilar to a collection of books. to the early congress, the joint committee on the library of

those investigations were not always reported to congress, only recommendations are reported to congress, leaving a gap between who knew and who had been involved in what. does the constitution require more? does the constitution speak to the possibility that congress can delegate its authority to local political parties? to be sure, while the removal of the political disabilities imposed pursuant to section three confess be characterized -- can best be characterized as perfunctory, we cannot get deeper than that working without the boilerplate petitions, but not all were resolved favorably. several were the subject of citizen remonstrance who protested the petitions for relief. judges more than other civil servants bore an inordinate share of the criticism over their attempts to have their rights stored. in virginia, the superintendent of the state penitentiary sent multiple missives noting how the state democratic judges persistently sentenced black defendants for hard time in the state prison over minor infractions. in early 1869, the superintendent reported negroes or center for stea

you have always been a way to that way to everyone in congress. it is a testament to your character that even when people take different positions, you give them the opportunity to speak and treat them well. i thank you for being a mentor to me and treating me well. jan schakowsky said he is a tiger. he is a detroit tiger and detroit lion. and he is a newt, and he wore his jacket to memphis to the civil rights museum. people appreciated you coming. i appreciate you coming. when i have a question about a vote and i am not sure, i look and see how john conyers voted and then i know how to vote. thank you for your service to the country and your friendship to me. [applause] >> thank you so much congressman cohen. we have been joined by congressman alan grayson of florida. congressman grayson has served florida's ninth district in the house of representatives since january 2013, a tireless advocate of campaign finance reform, fiscal responsibility, and reducing economic equality. congressman grayson was called the most effective member of the house by

and how much force congress will allow him to use.hether that will include continuation of air strikes that have already occurred, and are still occurring, and whether it goes further than that to include boots on the ground. host: we are talking with jeff mason, white house reporter from reuters. we want to get your comments on this. our phone lines are open. if you are at this -- active or retired military, the line for you is (202) 748-0003. jeff mason, let me go back to what we discussed at the beginning of the program congress did give george bush that authorization to fight al qaeda. why do some feel that is irrelevant today? guest: some have articulated that this is a different war and the different fight. president obama has been using that as justification for airstrikes already against the islamic state. it has been a long time, obviously, since that original authorization is granted. this is, at least from capitol hill and lawmaker's perspective, is different. host: this is a quote from nbc news he said, and the current cri

here, congress chose active verbs. meyer versus holly recognized, the fair housing act focuses on prohibitive acts. >> "make unavailable" is not the same language as "adversely affect." that is all i'm willing to concede. i think, if you thought that smith was wrong, which many people do, i suppose you could argue, we will not expand smith. smith hung on particular words, "adversely affect." those words don't exist here. therefore, since we think smith was wrong anyway, we are not going to extend it. that is a reasonable argument but that is not the argument you are making. what hangs me up is not so much that as it is the fact that congress seemingly acknowledged the effects test in later legislation. it said that certain efax will not qualify -- effects will not qualify. >> yes, justice scalia. >> why doesn't that kill your case? when we look at a provisional law, we look at the entire provision of law including later amendments. we try to make sense of the law as a whole. you see this statute, which has otherwise, "

republicans in congress. -- most republicans in congress. but the problem is on the left a lot of folks on the left are not happy with this either. it gives him too much authority. particularly because it keeps in place this 2001 war authorization. they say that in this administration, the last administration has abused that authorization, and they believe it should be repealedment so the president really -- repealed. so the president really is going to have a choice as this makes its way through congress. does he take on his own party and side with the republicans who control congress or does he stick to his guns and try to push what he believes is something that splits the difference between the two sides and makes pretty much nobody happy? that's a big question going forward and something we're going to see here in the coming weeks. is there a chance that nothing will happen? >> guest: there's certainly a chance of that. i mean, it would be really stunning to see that happen particularly in the aftermath o

in making in congress. he may adjourn but summit congress adjourned so that's not really a power. he shall receive ambassadors and ministers. that means that the president then shall be the head of state and conduct the functions of a head of state at least diplomatically. and the last one is this wonderful one, he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. so when you look through that the only two that have any power really at all is the power to pardon, which could be significant under certain circumstances, but the power and the obligation to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. and i don't know that i've heard an argument as to how the president might be doing that under the circumstances we are discussing here today. not only is he violating his own oath of office, it's very, very clear that he is that i'm not going to enforce the laws that i don't want to enforce and by the way, i'm going to recommend legislation to you and if you don't pass that legislation then i'm going to implement it but my executive edict. and i'm going to take care that the laws

in conflict with congress. in terms of somebody being harmed by this, if the president issues these work permits and the background is that people were here illegally are under the employment mandate, if i am an american citizen applying for a job and 70 here has a work permit with the same skills qualified for the same wage, the person who is here illegally would be cheaper for the business to higher because they do not have to provide obamacare and they would for an u.s. citizen. so in that instance would a u.s. citizen have the potential to bring a lawsuit challenging that? >> it is possible though in terms of standing what the affected citizen would have to establishes but-for, the aca eligibility -- >> let's assume the employer said i'm saving $3000 so i would've hired you. >> yes i think you could establish standing. >> i yield back. >> on behalf of all of us, this concludes the hearing. we want to thank our four panelists for your collegiality with members of the committee and your collegiality with one

congress declares war, congress funds war, the president is the commander-in-chief. we have ratings from others -- madison explained why they did it that way and what he said is the world today, war is an executive function, for a king or a sultan or a monarch. we are altering the course of human history and making the beginning of war not for the monarch, but for the people's elected representatives. a debt that because madison knew that executives overreach. but madison was naive because he didn't also realize that legislatures -- there has been a symbiotic pathology of executive overreach and legislative edification since the ink was dry. it is bipartisan -- the matter who was in president or who is in congress, it has been bipartisan. the right answer is not just the one that is constitutional. the constitutional allocation of powers was based on a value judgment that you don't send people to risk their lives unless there is a political consensus that the mission was worth it. even when the mission was worth it asking people to risk their lives a big ask. but whe

we need to move the congress, we need to scare the congress, we need the president to lead. three parts to make possible this change. because this change is possible. it takes one statute. i think we need 15 senators to switch place. it's possible if people like you stand up and focus not just on the simple injustice, the injustice of the corrupt criminal, but the real justice that we've got to bring back to the system, to the equality of citizens which this system has lost. it is my view, it is my life that this boy started me on that we can get back. it is possible. but the key here is an old harvey milk strategy -- it's possible if we give people hope that there is something that can be done. not hope in the sense our friend obama has abused the term, but hope in the sense of what vaclav havel described. here's what he said about hope. hope is a state of mind, not of the world. it is a dimension of the soul, is not prognostication, it's an orientation of the spirit and an orientation of the heart. hope is not the same thing as joy that things are going well or a willingne

the simple injustice around the institution that is congress will stop -- that is congress. we all know the perception of their confidence in this institution has collapsed. 7% have confidence in the institution of congress. the crown jewel of our democracy according to our framers article one, congress, 7% of us trust. more than 50% call the institution corrupt. when we talk about it being corrupt, we focus on people like jack abram off -- jack a runoff or william jefferson, people we think of as criminals. there is a quote corruption inside this is the tuition, no doubt. but there is also no doubt that the failure of this institution is not produced by that form of corruption. it is a different kind of corruption, a more fundamental kind of corruption. it is not bad souls engaging in criminal acts, it is good souls engaged in a system that drives to this corruption. if we wanted to solve that corruption, we would have to look elsewhere. look elsewhere from beyond the risen walls, but we don't do that. we can't do that, not because it's hard. our focus is on the simple inju

eventually the congress took over. 1874, congress canceled territorial government, to get back -- took it back, and so he was out of a job. six years later he went down to mexico. after -- there were two major congressional investigations, 1874, shepherd was a target of these. every allegation against shepherd -- he was never found to be personally dishonest. a lot of cut corners, a lot of crony capitalism, a lot of things that would not pass today, but it was -- and people all around him were making money, cutting deals subcontracting, and making money off the taxpayers, but shepherd himself -- i've never found evidence of really personal wrongdoing. i should add that in the 22 years of silver mining, i think he was an upright and honest person, but my wife says i'm a pathetic fan of shepherd, no judgment at all in my part. there's a lot of evidence of that. really quickly, a couple of minutes here, and then i'll let you guys as some questions. 1874, at the territorial government was canceled, for four years there was a temporary form of government, guess what? it was seen at the time

and here is what the president wants from congress. a three-year authorization to replace the 2003 iraq authorization. the post 9/11 one would remain in the books. they say enduring offensive ground combat operations but leave the door open for potential boots on the ground. we'll report on what that means coming up. and the term isis and associated persons or forces. that is who the white house targets but it does not restrict force to just iraq and syria. the white house has agreed to report back to congress every six months. now on the hill the possibility of ground troops and broad geographic targets are raising concerns but not from this president's usual critics, it's democrats who want more detailed definitions. and meanwhile, they say congress should not manage an unpredictable war from the republicans. the house foreign affairs committee will hold the first hearing on the president's request tomorrow. but many committees want to hold hearings today. one aide said this could be delayed until june for a vote. and we'll hear from

congress who are similarly wary of iran.epublicans and some democrats want to impose some more sanctions while the negotiations are ongoing. >> so that's why i have little hope in this deal athat that's why prime minister netanyahu is so concerned about the deal. see doesn't have the luxury of living an illusion, he doesn't have the luxury that somehow we can work this out that we're somehow dealing with luxembourg or belgium. he knows their true intentions. >> i don't want to be coy. the prime minister and i have real differences around iran sanctions. david cameron and angela agree with me, that it does not make sense to sour the negotiations a month or two before they're about to be completed. >> netanyahu now walks a fine line between the executive and the legislative branches of the government, rocking the bipartisan zone occupied by israel and his own job is not secure. >> equally i know that the president appreciates my responsible. my foremost responsibility to protect and defend the security of israel. i'm going to

congress continues to get paid. defending our airports and making sure the airline and aviation's charity is upheld. that is something we should not do. congress should come back and get that done. host: saying congress needs to get this funding done. you could jeopardize homeland security. the deadline is february 27. lawmakers back in their home states for the president's day week. they have just a few days to get this resolved. cbs writes the first of the orders to expand a program from deportation was set to start taking effect tomorrow. the other major part of the action was not expected to begin until may 19. the coalition fighting the president's action, led by texas , argue that mr. obama has violated the take care clause of the u.s. constitution which limits the scope of presidential power. the order will force increased investment in law enforcement health care, and education. the coalition says it will be necessary because it would be difficult or impossible to undo the president's lawlessness after the d

why does he want congress to tie his hands? we'll bring back our sunday panel to discuss it. ...that sound good? not being on this phone call sounds good. it's not muted. was that you jason? it was geoffrey! it was jason. it could've been brenda. jack's heart attack didn't come with a warning. today, his doctor has him on a bayer aspirin regimen to help reduce the risk of another one. if you've had a heart attack be sure to talk to your doctor before your begin an aspirin regimen. if you're running a business legalzoom has your back. over the last 10 years we've helped one million business owners get started. visit legalzoom today for the legal help you need to start and run your business. legalzoom. legal help is here. ♪♪ with kaiser permanente you'll connect with your doctor any time anywhere. another way care and coverage together makes life easier. ♪♪ become a member of kaiser permanente. because together, we thrive. ♪ what's that thing? i moved our old security system out here to see if it could monitor the front yard. why

expect republicans in this new congress to raise taxes on u.s. corporations particularly given the anti-tax bent in the gop base. >> using progrowth to pay for our bill. it works in reducing corporate tax rates by removing the 35% tax rate that would apply to overseas foreign earnings that currently aren't taxed as they're sitting over there but if they were brought back there would be a 35% rate that would apply to them. our proposal would be to tax those untaxed corporate earnings overseas once at 14%, 21% reduction, and to bring those over here the proceeds of that over here to put to work for infrastructure. it would pay for our bill get us double what the gas tax now is producing and get us going. host: have you talked to law makers met with them and what are you hearing from them? guest: the proposal is one that actually enjoys bipartisan support in many ways. if you remember about a year ago the chair of the house ways and means committee at that time dave camp put a white paper if you will that used this very same framework. and we think

members of congress even. members of congress even. >> rerack that again. law makers strapped for cash like ordinary americans? melissa, i'm guessing the average american would love to make what congress makes. >> absolutely. that is one of the most embarrassing comments i heard in a long time. that's saying a lot because congress people are always embarrassing themselves. she needs to look at the math. the fact of the matter is the average congress person's pay package is three times what regular americans on average make. they're up above $170,000. the average american makes about $55,000. they have no idea what it's like to live in an average household and to even try and compare themselves is disingenuous pathetic and disgusting. >> you don't believe that, jonas. you say big paychecks and big bills, you still need your paycheck. >> yeah. okay. you can make $1 million more than anybody in the government makes, except the contractors. you got used to stuff. you've got a $20,000 mortgage payment. you can't just get out of that because you are just addicted

did the fact that president ford came from congress influences effort to involve congress in checking the executive? >> i think the answer is yes. sometimes people refer to president ford's presidency as a congressional presidency, and i think that is partly because he was the only person that could get confirmed to be able to occupy the position of vice president, and the reason he's the only person they thought they could get confirmed is because he was basically so popular in congress. he came into the position of vice president and later became president with people in congress at least respecting him as an individual -- not always agreeing with him, but thinking he was a very decent man, a very thoughtful person. he is basically being a good steward. i say that knowing that we should not overstate the good relations he had with congress. he actually had a remarkable number of his vetoes overridden by congress. more vetoes overridden by congress in his short presidency than were even overridden by nixon in the last couple years of his administration. that goodwill did not always e

with the congress. and whether that is involvement with our economic development and commerce committee which will meet today as mentioned government bentley and shemlen from alabama and vermont respectively have been called upon to testify before the senate committee on environment and public works to discuss some long-term fixes on our transportation reauthorization for example. as mentioned we were talking about flexible federalism. there needs to be the opportunity for us in states the common theme you will hear and most everything we discuss is give the states more autonomy and be flexibility to do what we need to do in our own back yards and try to stay away of one size fits all solution that doesn't necessarily fit with all the respective states. a new and emerging issue that is growing concern i see the state department some of the hacking taking place and not being able to solve that but cybersecurity is a significant issue. this new frontier of how people steal information and money online and

congress you know?you know, everybody holds out to the last minute to get the best deal they possibly can. that's sort of part of the art of negotiating. and so -- so you know. i think we have to be patient. but i do believe, as i said earlier, the clock is ticking on both sides of the table. i mean president obama's time in office is very limited. and then you have the situation in iran where the iranian government the rouhani government, has to have some success here and has to be able to demonstrate to their constituents within iran that an improved relationship with the united states and the west will yield benefits to iran. and if they're not able to show that, then their popularity and their politics in iran collapses as well. so, you know i kept hearing when i was in iran that we have a window of opportunity the window isn't going to stay open indefinitely. so the clock is ticking on both sides. and i think that it is time for us, and hopefully by the end of march we can have the framework at lea

if congress does not address the disability insurance trust fund in this congress, this is in this congress, under the current law as it exists, those benefits would have to be reduced by 20%. the issue before congress how does he propose to deal with that budget? there are proposals out there. i don't think fraud is a major issue. there is some inefficiencies. we know there were some in new york with some of their disability programs. the vast majority of people deserve the benefits you are getting. the question is whether those who want to work can find work and not be disenfranchised by the disability program by the way it set up. this is a big issue. it's one that i did not see addressed this morning, at least in the initial release of material the president put out. host: lots of numbers will still be coming out today. we will be chatting about them tomorrow as well as new details come out. we are talking with william hoagland. joe is in kentucky on the line for democrats. you are up joe. caller: we keep talking about the budget every year. whatever has happened to the plan? guest: the

he usually circumvents congress. what is your theory behind why the president will ask for war powers from a congress he often circumvented? >> well let's start off at one point he was a constitutional law professor. since the attacks on pearl harbor the war powers act even though it did give the president enormous amount of power, congress is supposed to be the vital part in the decision-making process. that goes back to the founding of the country and federalist papers. i don't care who the president is i'm very happy he or she is involving congress because that is what is supposed to be done. do i think he would love to use this to get a little bit of popular opinion behind him? look andrea in a courthouse. not exactly a bastion of conservatism. if you hear the way attorneys and judges and court officers are talking about what took place, obviously no one knew the young woman died but about the burning of the jordanian man, i'm hearing words like, nuclear attack, from america, from on that region of the world. the

and we give congress the authority to go pretty far in terms of reaching things that congress determined were badges or indicators of slavery. any cases which make that a lot more difficult than i just made it sound. >> ladies and gentlemen, you've just heard a superb lesson in constitutional law, and i want you to go and follow up on the cases that chief judge mentioned. he just told -- >> it's not in here. >> really amazing. >> tragically you can't find these cases in this document. but you can find them in the new equally thrilling, interactive constitution. that the national constitution center is creating. this advisory board with the federalist society and the constitution society and when we launch on constitution day next year you'll be able to click on any provision of the bill of rights and original constitution, see commentary on the leading cases written by the top scholars on both sides of the aisle both what they agree about and what they disagree about. and we've just done a model where rick pildas and brad smith write about the 15th amendment and you'll see what they thin

why does he want congress to tie his hands?e'll bring back our sunday panel to discuss it. >>> our coalition is on the offensive. isil is on the defensive and isil is going to lose. il is >> it is right and appropriate for us to be vigilant and aggressive in trying to deal with that, the same way that a a big city mayor has got to cut nd the crime rate down if he wants that city to thrive. >> president obama asking congress to authorize military force in the fight against isis, but sending mixed messages about the urgency of the war on itary terror, and we're back now with the panel. >> we've already apparently made about some news today with our ar on exclusive interview with john boehner. >> we just got a statement from a ly m spokesman for nancy pelosi, the house democratic leader. she says this: the speaker's reliance on talking points and finger-pointing was a sad reflection of the fact that tea party continues -- i think it should be that "the" tea party continues to hold the gavel as y they insist on their futile anti-im

new congress best access. on sara:, sara: c-span radio and c-span.org. >> earlier this week, federal communication commission chair tom wheel area nounsed his proposal to regulate the internet like a utility. president obama also proposed recently. the plan would senten the f.c.c.'s regulation of internet, extends the rules to mobile phones and devices and allow the f.c.c. to step in and address interconnection issues as they arise. the plan is to ban fast and slow lanes for delivery of content over the internet. the proposal was to be presented to the other four f.c.c. commissioners today. the f.c.c. is to vote on that on february 26. internet service providers such as comcast ver oozeon and tat tat have strongly opposed such regulation. and some leaders in congress also strongly opposed such a move. join us on saturday for a special presentation of our communicators program. we'll good indepth on the chairman's announcement. the f.c.c. counsel will join us to talk about the proposed new rules. that's at 6:30

congress declares war, congress funds war, the president is the commander-in-chief. we have ratings from others -- madison explained why they did it that way and what he said is the world today war is an executive function, for a king or a sultan or a monarch. we are altering the course of human history and making the beginning of war not for the monarch, but for the people's elected representatives. a debt that because madison knew that executives overreach. but madison was naive because he didn't also realize that legislatures -- there has been a symbiotic pathology of executive overreach and legislative edification since the ink was dry. it is bipartisan -- the matter who was in president or who is in congress, it has been bipartisan. the right answer is not just the one that is constitutional. the constitutional allocation of powers was based on a value judgment that you don't send people to risk their lives unless there is a political consensus that the mission was worth it. even when the mission was worth it asking people to risk their lives a big ask. but when

in fact, as a member of congress, he was a member of congress for two years, one term. he passed a proposed legislation. it didn't pass. that said that slavery should be ended in the district of columbia provided it was done voluntarily, there was compensation for the slave owners, and the slaves were colonized. and that was a view that he had had all along and actually many of the founding fathers had the view and many people actually supported the 13th amendment, had the view that blacks and whites could never live to get. and in fact, many of the great abolitionists in our country the most famous abolitionists, they thought slavery was immoral and should be gotten rid of. but many of them actually favored colonization as well. many of them did not want blacks coming to the north and coming to the northern parts of the united states and think were viewed taking jobs away from whites. so it wasn't as if people had the view that blacks and whites could give together. very, vep few people in those days who thought that was going to be realistic. >> it's important that yo

if it doesn't get through congress they believe the congress will look worse than the president of the united states who sent it up here and b, they'll be prosecuting the war against isis as they've been doing for the last six months. >> nothing is more important than authorizing men and women to fight a war. >> keep in mind there are 3,000 american men and women authorized to go into the war zone there and there have been deaths associated with it though not in combat. you see u.s. forces moving closer to combat. this is one thing i would say. you look at this there's language here limiting scope, duration use of ground troops but there's potential for circumstances to get ahead of whatever language is here. associated persons or forces with isis. isis is already in other countries other than iraq and syria, libya, yemen, purporting to have supporters in other places. you have a war expanding well beyond iraq and syria. >> danielle you had a chance to go through proposed legislation and separate statement the congress sent to congress what do you think? >> the president is focused on

out of kuwait my first vote in the congress. i've always believed that we should give the authority to the president to win the battles that we need to win, and i don't believe that the authorization the president asked for will give him the tools he needs to defeat isil. he says, well the threat is being diminished. the fact is isil continues to gain new territory. >> after hearings, after debate, will the republican congress give the president authorization to continue this fight? >> we're going to have discussions. we're going to have a thorough hearing. we're going to have a big debate. and how that turns out is i think is too early to predict. because to do this correctly, i think we need to have bipartisan support on both sides of the capital. so there will be a lot mover discussion about this in the weeks ahead. >> finally you have set up a select committee to investigate what happened in benghazi, even though there have been about a half dozen investigations, the republican controlled house intelligence committee basical

if we're going to have netanyahu come and speak to a joint session of congress, perhaps members of congress would like to have ministers the reef testify before the congress and have opportunity to ask him questions. why not? >> i think he has enough problems with his own congress. [laughter] >> he might be invited to come and testify before congress and answer questions and talk about this stuff. why are we afraid of information? why are we afraid to talk to people and learn from them? that sort of puzzles me. >> we at the olympic council are not afraid of it. we are really grateful that you had time to come by today. >> really great to visit with y'all. [applause] >> german chancellor angela markel and president obama held a news conference at the white house yesterday. that is next on c-span. topics on this morning "washington journal" -- combating the militant group isis. and we will have a guest on federal -- historic black colleges and universities. >> we will hear from dr. mark sawyer. live coverage from the health, education, labor, and pensions committee start this morning at 10 a.

should that be done by congress? shouldn't congress be taking care that business?t seems to me that too much is being done by executive order. when i read the constitution, it says there is a process that we need to adhere to when we do things in this country. host: thank you. what led the president initially to increase the number of people in this pay as you earn program? guest: i think we need to record highs that congress is not particularly nimble in creating these programs we did have action in 2007 and 2000 11 to increase eligibility of the income-based repayment programs. the president expanded that in 2014. the result of this variety of action is a piecemeal program. it has created a lot of confusion for borrowers. i understand where the motivation for the executive action is coming from. really what we needed congressional action to clean up this mess of programs that we have so that we have something simple for borrowers. host: what is the prospect of that? guest: i will not even take a guess. host: let's go to marry from michigan. loan holder. caller: i

let's talk about sending this resolution up to congress from the president, asking congress to join him, authorize him to fight isis, the democrats say it goes too far the republicans say it doesn't go far enough, it looks like the whole thing could just blow up in his face and make this worse. we put together what we think is the likeliest outcome to get a strong bipartisan showing. >> they will have hearings on it and make some decisions for themselves. we have given them a good place to start. we will see where they end. i will say this, though, bob. what they shouldn't do this time is what they did in 2013, when they took a pass on this issue. it is very important in questions of war and peace for congress to be heard, the president has given them a road map to follow, they can take that or they can come up with something else but they should not take a pass on this important issue. >> isis is committing and continuing to commit these heinous crimes, four americans have been killed washington responds by saying we need to have a debate and it is a debate that could take some time. >

what happens now in congress?ob to roll-up the sleeves and get the votes. he says he's optimistic but can he get there? this is the obama doctrine. a, i'm not george w. bush. b, no endless ground wars. the thing they talked about a couple months ago, don't do stupid stuff. republican critics say that's not really a strategy to get it done. how do you actually win, shep when you say we're not going to have u.s. ground troops? as you were noting a moment ago the white house is boasting about the fact that there's fuzzy language in this authorization for the use of military force. that fuzzy language is being picked apart by democrats who fear it's so fuzzy it will be mission creep and republicans picking it apart saying what is the strategy to actually win? the final point i would make is the president was very aggressive in saying isis is on defense. we're on offense and he specifically said, they are going going to lose. however, the associated press had a report saying that the coalition's bombing campaign is not

or any congress. it affects tens of millions of americans directly in terms of their health care. which goes right to the essence of who we are as human beings. clearly, there is a collision potentially coming with the supreme court decision. it is probably not likely given the president's very clear admonitions about how you will not accept any piece of legislation that modifies this in any significant way through a repeal and replacement, but there is a potential collision and it would be irresponsible for the administration not to have a plan to address that should the decision not come down the way you would like. i don't have a question, it is just an affirmative statement that it would cause great chaos and be totally irresponsible. someone ought to be looking at what do we do if. i want to personally thank you for your engagement with our current governor, governor pence wanted me to pass on his thanks. from us two years of engagement over request for a waiver for the state of indiana. our form

ahead of that, you will have the israeli prime minister netanyahu coming to congress and talking to congress in a joint session. the headline in the new york times today says, "netanyahu speech creates uproar and faces pressure to ask u.s. appearance. ." guest: you do not want a condemnation. usually, he is a police for people who say anti-semitic things. this is a place where he has decided to come out on an issue that is sort of outside of that scope. the president and the white house are angry at nine yahoo! for a great number of things. i think what they sensed was an overreach here by speaker boehner and some overreach from netanyahu for coming over here. the idea that candidate would go to another country, in the middle of his own election, is ridiculous. you remember president obama going over to europe and middle east. mitt romney traveling around the world. we dishonor chris christie over in europe. this is a time honored tradition for a lot of folks. i think the anger is a little bit of generated out rage that the president was cut out of an invitation from congress. congress has a

congress submitits a defense budget reqst to congress. to discuss the military compensation report, catherine kidder, who recently co-authored a primer on military compensation j davis, a spokesman for the veterans of foreign wars, one of the leading military a advocacy groups, and mackenzie england -- eglan n of the american enterpre initute. seeing as how your organization represents 1.9 million active guard reserve veterans and their families, what is the prospect dod willll pick this up? >> livy w looks at the entire report as the start of a conversation that neededs to be carried into conongress. having a a governmen match program is good. you are looking for quality people to retain through and beyond retirement. the next commandant of the marine cps is sergeant major of the army -- we need someone the top of the field, not the last person standing. going into tri-care, the chahange in military retirement and the feesor the retirees -- like everything else on the v.a., we are slightly disappointed. we wanted to see a joint military

i am not sure this congress is going to relate to last congress. but certainly we are at a point where the bitter partisanship in congress has restrained the ability to really get things done and solve his problems like immigration or, you know, have a national energy policy. again, i don't think it is useful to compare whether it is worse than it has ever been. but it is not good. you go back to the, you know the level of bitterness that comes out of campaigns with all the negativity and the attack ads. you do see it occasionally, but you rarely see an attack ad in the private sector, right? you don't see coca-cola doing a attack at against pepsi, right? coke would attack pepsi, pepsi would attack coke, you'd depress the entire product category. to a certain extent, our system is depressing the category of democracy. young people turning off the news and are not reading the newspaper. i going in depth to policy issues. that is creating a situation in washington that is very problematic. again, some of that bitterness in the states, as well, but it