congress is not very diverse. in majority of members of congress are lawyers and professional politicians. how does that qualify you to be an expert on health care or banking or so many other issues that congress is tasked with governing? if we went to term limits with a citizen legislature, we would get people from all walks of life, real subject matter experts that could come in and tackle these issues. the constant emphasis on reelection is very corrosive to congress. instead of getting policy expertise, instead of actually reading the 1000 page bills we hear about all the time on the news, they are busy campaigning. the average congressman spends five hours a day in a call center on a telephone begging for money from big donors so that they can get reelected or pay off their party to get a prime spot on the committee. that is a distraction from your job. host: when they run for reelection, they usually win. the reelection rate for those members of congress who ran for reelection was 91%. secrets.bers from open

if congress wants to strengthen?et your point about the disclosure part, but what about the conflict of interest part. is that one-- >> no, and let me use that as a springboard for something that's key. i know your honors have some questions on this and i want to tie this down. for example, the lead here that's being looked into before the -- says the coherence, i could get this right, the lessor, the lessee. the coherence of a business from going business with gsa does that require the president to-- >> why does the committee need documents to answer that question? can't it just get it all from gsa? >> gsa wouldn't necessarily have the financial statements that are-- >> great. >> sorry. what would he have in his file? shouldn't everything need to be in gsa's file? >> no, a couple of things, your honor. one, and remember, i want to make sure -- i want to come back to it and-- >> i have a question about that, too. >> good. i said i have my notes and i want to talk about that. >> okay. >> for example, we need to know i

congress could set up legislation saying, first of all, congress could try to define. this gets to one of our most important points. his weight of asking you to rule , wehe constitutionality have no idea what it would be. if there is legislation, as you know, you pay difference to whatever conference -- congress passes. you determine if it is constitutional? you do that all the time. you say there is a presumption of constitutionality. the supreme court said members you only have the final say. you give deference. you are interested. here, if congress wanted to pass legislation saying here is what is in a million meant, here is not. it is ok. congress obviously would want to find out what is going on. with the arguments are. what emoluments are happening. draw a more precise connection? even assuming congress has the power to regulate in the area. betweenthe line specific financial records of the president. who is just one person. is the connection between those things? where does congress need to know the specific facts? >> especially with regard to hotels. what is hi

what can congress do? i would like another example. >> the one that has been raised -- >> you must have a theory about what can be done. what i am asking you is to name one other thing they can do to exercise oversight. whether you want to call it the president or the office of the president. >> appropriation. the power of the purse. >> that is not going to affect a sitting president. >> i don't think i am breaking new grounds to suggest the fight between the president and congress is mostly a political remedy between the branches and not a judicial -- you have not asked a political question here. >> i am trying to argue why don't think it fits. we will give you some of your time back. mr. leonard. leonard: may it please the court. the general counsel. indulge me for a moment the deputy general counsel. if you would indulge me for a moment. my intent is to ask my friend a number of probing questions. i intend to march through them. i wanted to start out by saying i don't get to say this very often. this is

. 115 congress, and the 116th congress. mr. letter: only the 116th congress your honor. judge engelhardt: we're talking about intent. you have spent a particular amount of time talking about the intent of the 110th congress and even more time talking about the intent of the 115 congress in 2017. should we also question why the senate is not here to talk about intent, the will of congress when necessarily him, the senate, what and it echo why would they not be here to make the organs you're making? your honor, the that we areemember pointing to the text of what congress passed in 2017. judge engelhardt: you pointed us also to some quotes from members of different parties of congress in 2017. it seems like we are back to the text,hich i'm happy -- which i'm happy here. mr. letter: you should take comfort from the fact that the speaker of the house and senate majority leader agreed on this. but let's just go to the text. the text is, we got rid of the penalty, we put the taxes zero. and we left the entire rest of the statute i

we demand term limits for members of congress. according to the most recent national polls, 82% of americans want term limits. that includes support from republicans, democrats, and independent voters. this is not a left or right issue. it is an american issue. term limits could be the only issue with support from both president trump and former president obama. there was a time 25 years ago when congress was debating this. nearly every opponent of term limits had the same rebuttal. experience. we need experience to do this job right. if only they will become such a policy expert that all her problems be solved. in hindsight, that was the worst predictions ever. the system is broken. congress has given us $22 trillion in debt, the longest war in american history, a broken health care system, a tax code written by lobbyists, an explosion of money in politics. and a broken immigration system. too few here have the courage to address these problems because the only focus is on getting reelected. that is why it comes as no surprise th

congress is under the constitution, empowered with enumerating the clause, and congress handed off the baton and said, you know what, you fill in the blanks for us. you make regulations for us, and commerce did. that is the part that the supreme court struck down was the agency's lawmaking at the the has of congress. so this is a nuance that is quite complicated, but again, it is front and center, the headline is something people feel strongly about, and people do not really understand. thanks that happened in the last 20, 30 years, social media, obviously massive amounts of new technology, and we have all kinds of information coming at us that is not exist here when i was a kid, we had a few channels and newspapers, now it is hard to determine what is accurate, what is not cured we know from the mueller investigation, the 2016 attack on our electoral process another foreign powers, in this instance, russia, is interested in him planting and misinformation in our inboxes. theobjective wit book is to break down the language, break down the policies, it is not an easy beach read, it is a

but today members of congress aren't doing that. and instead, far too many of our politicians come to washington to stay. too much of washington's business is dictated by career politicians, by bureaucrats, and by lobbyists who spent time as one or the other. the rise of political careerism in modern washington is a sharp departure from what the founders intended in our federal governing bodies. to effectively drain the swamp and end the phenomenon of career politicians, it is long past time to enact term limits for congress. i am the author of a constitutional amendment that would limit u.s. senators to two six-year terms, and would limit members of the house of representatives to three two-year terms. at this point we currently have 14 cosponsors in the senate. it is my hope that this hearing today will help explain why we should come together, republicans and democrats, across party lines, to enact term limits to protect the american people. the senate i believe should take up and vote on the term limits amendment that i've intro

it is nicknamed the fix congress committee. we have passed five recommendations, primarily focused on improving transparency. next week, we are going to take up about two dozen recommendations focused on issues around staffing and specifically out of concern you have seen massive, massive turnover in the legislative ranch. -- branch. what fills that void is the executive branch and lobbyists. that does not serve the interests of the american people. you will see recommendations focused on technology. importantly, one of the recommendations i think you will see moved is a recommendation at the beginning of each congress that there were some effort to have a joint meeting by democrats and republicans to identify things that can be worked on together. right now at the beginning of congress democrats go to their side of the room, republicans go to their side. the parties will do retreats where the discussion is focused on how do i jab the other party. one of the ideas mr. cleavers put on the table is why don't we have a collective

it gives congress the power to make laws. gives congress the power to execute those laws. it doesn't define the word, execution. i tell them to think of a prosecutor or police officer. the police officer doesn't decide what the speed limit is and hands it off to the prosecutor. it's a lot faster these days, you get something in the mail. the prosecutor doesn't make the laws, enforces the laws. under our system now the president does a lot of law making anyway. we've heard about executive orders. that's not in the constitution. it has been tolerated, and that's essentially the power of congress. we have heard about administrator of bureaucracy, too much regulation. this is a fight we just saw by the supreme court about the citizenship question. it wasn't about presidential power, per se, agency power. congress has the authority to set forth the limits what goes in the census form, under the constitution and empowered with implementing the ennumeration law. congress handed off the baton to the department of commerce and said, you fill in the blanks for us and make regulation

congress investigators -- epidemic. congress investigated the issues. we start with opponents of vaping. >> kids do not associate vaping and juuling. there have been articles and studies written about this, and i know because my son and i have commented on these stories. kids think they are juuling. they don't think they are vaping or using e-cigarettes. that is the truth. announcer: at 9:50 eastern, the ceo of juul labs, a manufacturer of e-cigarettes. >> we don't want underage consumers using these products. we need to work together to make sure that no underaged consumers use this product. it is terrible for business, public health, terrible for our reputation. none of this is good stuff. announcer: watch, monday, on c-span, online at c-span.org, or listen wherever you are with the free c-span radio app. announcer: in 1979, a small met anh -- small nets with with unusual name rolled out a big idea, lets viewers make up their own mind. c-span opened up policymaking for all to see, bringing unfiltered covers of congress -- coverage of congress and beyo

i don't want any administration whenll congress no, congress is asked with doing that oversight. candidly, until i find myself with the benefit of all the work you all have been doing i didn't understand the whole depth of this and see the value. did you offer these amendments and committee? >> every single one. >> and they were rejected? >> they were. >> wasn't bipartisan support and you could not get enough? >> it was straight party line. >> we have different rules here mr. chairman but i will give you a chance. >> i want to make sure when we have bipartisanship, we mention it. that is all. >> they ordered against putting some of them on. >> mr. chairman, i will yield back. >> i will admit to being a little unclear. are we talking the amendments? >> the amendments. >> when are we going to talk on the underlying? >> when they finish the questioning in reference to the amendment. >> very well. i will reserve my questions until we talk on the underlying bill. >> thank you. i just want to say i support the amendments and i hope they are in order. >> thank you. you came in a little

this is my third tour of duty in congress, because i started, like many members of congress, as a summer intern for the then-member of the first congressional district of hawaii. i worked steps away from where we are shooting this. this is like coming home again. i spent three years with him. then, later on, came back to congress. >> when you left after serving that first time in washington, why did you decide to leave? rep. case: i ran for the u.s. senate. like many u.s. good u.s. house members, you aspire to the u.s. senate. i ran and i was not successful in that election. so i was involuntarily retired from the u.s. house. went back to hawaii and as my job as a lawyer and hotel executive. i had a productive 12 years, but politics and government were still out there for me. it lured me back. >> how did this come about? rep. case: i did not like the direction of this country. i had a great life, great job, i felt i had left government and politics behind. i had had a number of full years in the state legislature and u.s. congress, was satisfied with my service. but i felt things were de

we don't like this member of congress, we don't like we have empowered congress we will switch it. with the supreme court of the united states we don't have that power. that is a nuance people don't understand. we talk about rights on the supreme court level. that is important on both sides, but the supreme court has powers that extends beyond that that affects our individual lives. understanding how that works and how it functions in relation to the other two branches is really important for every american. host: the book is called "how to read the constitutions and why"" kimberly wehle joining us for this discussion. republican line, you're next. caller: i believe wholeheartedly in our constitution. i don't think it should ever be changed. i am disappointed with the supreme court decision over the on the census.n i think everyone in the country be counted for. host: finish your thought. i just feel that that decision was very wrong. bill is in virginia, independent line. i am gladofessor, that you have written this book in my discussion with folks, so many americans don't underst

congress makes the law. way back when, congress started creating agencies so if you drive around washington, d.c. and see these buildings say department of, that is an agency in the executive branch of the congress says listen, we don't have the expertise, we don't have the political willpower, we are going to give you the power to make the wall for us. we call that a regulation so when people say too much regulation, it is too regulated, congress gave them that power and that's becoming more and more important because they are not doing anything in terms of actual policy anymore. there is the accord at some point in the early 20th century says okay we are going to allow that so long as they give guidepost agencies that justice thomas for example, the whole federal regulatory state is unconstitutional. only congress can make the law because only congress can be voted out of office. the secretary of commerce, wilbur ross, we can't go to the ballot box and throw him out. we can't do it. so that is the theory t

contempt of congress is one of congress' most powerful tools and should be wielded responsibly. this is not a responsible use of that authority. this is an attempt to delegitimize the citizenship question. something that frankly, everyone in the country thinks we are already asking, because we are, and everyone things we should continue. consider this. reformrsight and committee has legislative jurisdiction over citizens -- over census. if democrats wanted to remove the question, they could've marked up delegate holmes-norton's bill. no hearings on that bill. they want to go with contempt instead. i would urge the committee to vote against it. i yield back. mr. chairman: i see you submitted an amendment. would you like to testify on that amendment now? >> if that is appropriate for the chair. we have five amendments. we offered these all in committee. mr. chairman: one amendment. but go ahead. >> they are all facts. one says the number of documents i just described and the fact mr. gore voluntarily appeared in front of the committee. the other says the secretary of commerce prod

there's a lot for congress to look at.but i also want to sign on to everyone's comments, if you're involved in this business and in the audience it's because you love music were all for ensuring that the most music is out there and consumable by the public in any variety of ways and forms and look forward to having discussions as an industry with any of you if your bosses are interested in taking a closer look. >> i appreciate kevin challenging the premise. has a look at it, congress is in a relationship with two other indices. like judiciary and the executive office. jay-z is in a relationship with beyoncÉ, also if congress can together, the house and senate as a resolution, not that we would want to listen to, and they sing a song and composite and jd did the same thing, it turns out that congress doesn't have the ability to operate that song. and that when daisy wins. is that correct? >> i believe that assures. >> i want to thank all of our panelists including ricky and everybody else they came and participated. thanks

there are quiet allies outside of congress as well. this is viewed as a collection get thingss that can done. you see a lot of interest from outside organizations as well as people inside. forced ship to cave. billthe more moderate through. weeks theen in recent flex their muscle. >> where do you see the new democrat coalition? it depends on what the narrative of the day is. you see the president's controversial tweets, republicans defending the president. .ringing together the moderates maybe not solidly unified. with the united front, more so than last week. controversials tweets have brought them together. you sow widespread support for increasing the minimum wage to $15. that is something many of these new democrats or more moderate numbers were able to get on board with after some changes were made. see them as more of a quiet force. they will be a force to be reckoned with. especially when it comes to getting closer to the 2020 election cycle. pelosi has called, speaker pelosi has called some of them the majority makers. there ha

people liked him and congress. if you think about the caning of charles sumner as this experience of someone getting drunker and drunker and deciding to amp things up to that degree, maybe you can see it much more as a contingent event rather than an obvious clash between north and south. i would say that it depended on where you were when you went to the polls, because cities tended to be incredibly violent, even in new england. new york city was an incredibly violent place. going to the polls there, you were taking your life into your hands. anything? michael w.: everything stephen douglas did was certainly fueled by alcohol. he had a number of brawls in illinois that he lost. he had a tendency to provoke them and then lose. the other thing i would say is if you went further west, politics looks very violent on the pacific coast and in places like that, too. there is certainly not a shortage of violence. i do think one of the things a lot of the violence in congress did is it did promote the kind of regional or s

that's well within congress. there are about a dozen justices that retired in ten years because of misconduct getting huge pensions. there's language could be inserted into law. as soon as you become a justice, that becomes a question, extra judicial question up to you guys. i don't see how you square the two. >> thank you. we will now have five minutes of questions from the gentleman from pennsylvania. >> thank you. i appreciate it. i'm troubled by the recommendations. i was a magistrate judge, rather young, but disclosure of information is troubling. there was a district judge in pennsylvania who his father-in-law was killed because there was assassination attempt on the district judge. you're dealing with some bad individuals. you're sending people to jail. i think the disclosures are troubling. the recusal explanation is counterintuitive. as a judge, you only recuse for certain personal reasons. if you require a judge to say why he or she is recusing could have the unintended consequence of keeping the judge

as a hinge moment in congress? rachel: i think 1855 is a moment that has a lot to it because there is a lot of shifting and political parties that happens at this time. when you are thinking about why congress reflects what is going on in the rest of the country, you have to understand that the priority is disintegrating at this point. it is a turning point in those kinds of ways, and congress reflects that. i am not sure it totally breaks down what goes down in congress. certainly there were other examples of new influxes of new the period in before. but it does reflect a change going on in the country in the way that the two-party system that had existed to that point twoit was not entirely party, but it was more focused -- it hasnd democrats started to disintegrate in a more tangible way in terms of people being elected to congress. michael b.: where did the emotions fit in we went through the 1850's? what is the take away we should have from that? nicole: one -- michael w.: one of the emotions i focused on was

as the mueller report's frequent references to congress make clear, congress has a role in investigating the potential presidential misconduct he uncovered so that it may determine how best to exercise his article one authorities to act as a check on the abuse or misuse of executive branch power. in light of his jurisdiction and past precedent, this is committee in particular has a constitutional duty to investigate allegations of misconduct by executive branch officials including the president of the united states and is currently investigating allegations of abuse of power, public or r corruption and obstruction of justice within the trump administration. the purpose of this hearing is to examine the range of constitutional remedies available for addressing presidential misconduct under its article 1 authors. today's discussioning will aid the committee in determining the remedies available to it as the investigation unfolds. under article 1 authorities, congress has a number of responses to presidential misconduct available to it. with regard to the committee's responsibility, to dete

to congress. by ensuring the federal government is adequately staffed with inspectors general, we are reaffirming our commitment to rooting out government fraud, waste, and abuse. i urge my colleagues to support this burn legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. >> i'd like to yield as many minutes as he'd like to consume to the distinguished gentleman, a member -- excuse me, the sponsor of this legislation. representative ted lieu. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. thank the t me gentleman for your work on this legislation. i rise in support of h.r. 47, the inspector general enhancement act to enhance the independence and integrity of our i.g.'s. these government watchdogs have played a crucial role in our democracy. they root out waste, fraud, mismanagement and abuse at all levels of government, saving the american taxpayer billions of dollars annually and ensuring that

dialogue with congress.i guess start debating political reform -- congress could start debating political reform. what if it advances so well to the point where they start to debate reelection and whether .hould continue or not this administration has a major choice in front of them, whether they strengthen their solid base in support, 20, 25%, testament to the rest of the support that the president still has in the name of a cultural agenda that the parliament does , and a constructive dialogue with the grim and abandoning the cultural agenda that congress does not want an seeking a reformist agenda that could lead to a victory as big as the pension reform, which is .ax reform these are the routes of the next six months. paulo: monica, go first. thank you.ica: there was a very nice way of doing a probability tree of different scenarios that could play out. let me say a few things about the conflictive aspect. for anybody who follows brazil closely, you will know that brazil has had -- it expired this year -

congress has a constitutional duty. we have a duty to conduct oversight over decisions that have been made in the executive branch, especially regarding leases or contracts that impact taxpayers. it is our job to ensure that these decisions are being made in the most cost effective and efficient fashions. without favoritism, or abuse. the committee is conducting two separate investigations involving gsa. what is the role in the decision of the plan to move the fbi headquarters to a new site. suburban campus. and the other of gsa's management, of the lease for the trump hotel in the district of columbia. my interest in these topics is not new, and should not be a surprise to gsa. i wrote my 1st letter on the trump hotel, and questions about a possible breach of lease shortly after the president was elected in the fall of 2016. along with several members of congress i 1st wrote to administrator emily murphy. raising questions about headquarters eight months ago. eight months ago. after becoming the committee chairman, cha

leaders and it's worse that members of congress don't know how to use an iphone and members of congress did not know apple made the iphone and a particular case where a member of congress was grilling the ceo of google arguing that google made the iphone and then paraded him because when the ceo said it depends what apps you have on your phone whether we can track you the congress person that i don't know what apps are and i don't care what apps are. there's a smugness and not understanding that culture has to change. >> a big news story and tech has been the washington story about ice and fbi accessing facial recognition data on every american in the country. drivers license and images and databases that the federal can access tell me what he thought of that story and the possibility that something will happen with this issue? >> guest: it is concerning. you know the facial recognition is not perfect and can be subject to racial profiling and has the inherent biases that are prevalent in society. i think what is necessary for us to have clear guidelines for the use of facial recognitio

remove members of congress? >> that's all about powers balance of powers. the idea is behind those restrictions is, as you well know, the effort to actually prevent the president or prevent the court from becoming all-powerful. >> do you agree with the rhetoric of coequal branches? every time the president tramples another constitutional right of value, principal, one of my guys get up and say we are coequal branches, mr. president. please pay attention to us! >> i do agree. >> before i go on, i disagree with it, and i want to tell you why, and i don't think it's just because i'm a member of congress. when i was a professor of additional law, i disagreed with it. that is not the way i see the constitution. the preamble starts with we, the people, in order to form a more perfect union and someone established the constitution. the very next them but says all legislative powers are vested in the congress. that you get pages of description of what the powers of congress are, and they are comprehensive. we have the p

congress in the same way. we're going to get to the bottom of all of it. >> do you think there's a high crime that the president obstruction justice? >> certainly. multiple times. each one of those episodes described -- >> if that's the case, let me press you on that. everything you just laid out viewers would say, yeah, that sounds bad and certainly in the congress's ambit to do something about it, but why would that require any further delay? there is a concern that the democratic party in the house talked a lot about waiting for things, waiting for mueller to finish, and waiting to get the report and waiting to get mueller to testify. we are now past all of that, and so a conversation about the trump hotel or, you know, legitimate concerns about constitutional limits about foreign bribes makes sense but not necessarily has a reason to wait further to deal with whether or not there's consequences for what you define as obstruction. >> i'm not talking about waiting. i'm talking about aggressively accelerating

and the bipartisan members of congress. mostly are women members of congress. we salute our cochairs of the bipartisan house caucus for women's issues. as congresswoman brenda lawrence and congresswoman debbie lesko. [ applause ] and let us welcome cokie roberts, a trailblazing force for women in journalism and her daughter rebecca an outstanding journalist in whole or in right, writing about women. [ applause ] as many of the women members know, the lindy boggs room in this room, the only rim name for a woman in the capital is named for cokie's lovely mother, and rebecca's grandmother, lindy boggs. i thanked her for her leadership. further acknowledgment, we think the bipartisan women's suffrage centennial commission for their leadership to educate the american public about the suffrage movement. we are honored to have the k james the chair of the committee, senator barbara mikulski the vice chair and rebecca c bish the executive director with us today. let us acknowledge them. [ applause ] into each and every one of you, i could name you all for the contribut

this is not an easy decision, but there comes to a time when the congress must speak up for the congress. i grant myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cummings: as a result, on april 2, more than three months ago, after a bipartisan vote, the committee subpoenaed these key documents, including a secret memo that the department of commerce wrote about the citizenship question and gave to the department of justice. the departments have admitted to us that this memo does exist , but they refuse to produce this document and many others. now, i must say in all credit -- give credit where credit is due. my good friend and colleague on the other side, mr. meadows, worked tirelessly to try to help us get the things that we needed, and i appreciate that. trying to work in a bipartisan way. going on from there, last month, in light of this obstruction, the oversight committee passed a resolution to hold attorney general barr and secretary ross in contempt of congress. the vote was also bipartisan. however, many of our republican colleagues ap

remove members of congress? >> that's all about powers balance of powers. the idea is behind those restrictions is, as you well know, the effort to actually prevent the president or prevent the court from becoming all-powerful. >> do you agree with the rhetoric of coequal branches? every time the president tramples another constitutional right of value, principal, one of my guys get up and say we are coequal branches, mr. president. please pay attention to us! >> i do agree. >> before i go on, i disagree with it, and i want to tell you why, and i don't think it's just because i'm a member of congress. when i was a professor of additional law, i disagreed with it. that is not the way i see the constitution. the preamble starts with we, the people, in order to form a more perfect union and someone established the constitution. the very next them but says all legislative powers are vested in the congress. that you get pages of description of what the powers of congress are, and they are comprehensive. we have the p

it is not anything to this congress. whether it is the decision to abolish a federal agency, a federal workforce, a multibillion-dollar construction decision affecting thousands of fbi staff and security and safety of the country, or the decision to allow a president to service the tenants of his own hotel which is on government owned property, such decision-making documents are critical to our examination and investigation. lastly, as i said, the fbi deputy director called me personally to discuss the agency's compliance or lack thereof and as i said, while i thanked him for the outreach and the 1.5 million documents he said have been examined, i did give him specific directions in terms of what would satisfy the committee's inquiry. unfortunately those conditions have not been met. it is my hope that today's hearing will provide some answers and prod our federal employees to cooperate with the committee of jurisdiction so we don't have to resort to methods of compulsion. and with that, i turned to my distinguished rank

congress is a bit different. what we're seeing in congress is kind of the opposite is taking a much stronger role, protagonist right now. the relationship is quite difficult. this bet that he made of trying to set up a new tone for the relationship has created a deep divide between the leaderships of congress and the executive. and those are not helped by tweets or comments that come from government, come from the president's sons criticizing the old way of doing politics in brazil. and we have some measurements to show that. so we do polling inside the congress to see how the congressmen themselves are viewing the relationship with the executive. so this first graph here shows the assessment of deputies in the house of representatives of the relationship to the bolsonaro government. these are the congressmen giving grades to how they view the relationship. the average at this point in may was 3.94, which was a very low average. it was similar to what we saw right before the impeachment. he has recovered a little

a member of congress from 95 to 2003. a member of the house judiciary committee and on the oversight committee for six years he served as an official for the time it was a member of congress to call for clinton's impeachment. the house impeachment manager in 1999 and presently private practice attorney in atlanta since leaving the house. plus the libertarian party nominee for president in 2008. we would like to hear from him and ask you to give a warm welcome to the congressman. [applause] i always appreciate the invitations to come to freedom fest and speak and probably more importantly to meet old friends, new friend, all of them who have a deep and abiding love for liberty and are always on the front lines of defending it against those who would take it away and in today's world as jim mentioned even in the congress of the united states, there are those who would take freedom away and undermine freedom. so, it's always wonderful to be a freedom fest which is one of those institutions undertaking in support of liberty.

a lot of people don't understand where congress is involved in the federal government and congress has oversight of those things. you'd be kind of surprised to find that out. we're going to go into more detail on that in just a minute. so as far as the speakers go, i'll introduce you to speakers in a second. there's a lot of players in the marketplace and it's really hard to understand. i apologize, should be about 20 people up here at least representing different perspectives. we didn't really have the space or the time to do that. so this is a good group of folks. let me just introduce them kind of alphabetically. to my right danielle aguirre, national music publishers association. next to her kevin erickson, future of music coalition. kevin is an artist, he's a songwriter, appear he's a producer. and then next to him is julia, vice president of global policy for sound exchange and she'll explain what that is and what that organization does. then next to her is curtis, who is the executive vice president of the national association of broadcasters. finally at the end. senior policy c

only congress can make laws because only congress can be voted out of office. we cannot go to the spots and throw him out. we cannot do that. that is the theory. we are living in it in this moment. it get super heavy. that is basically how it works out. the president also makes laws with the executive orders. there is no authority in that in the constitution. it's just been done a long time. we see this tug-of-war between the various branches. we have a three blanket -- >> i'm concerned what i tell people. regardless of where you are politically. one leg standing. having all the power. everything on the platform. we are giving that office a lot of power. that can be handed off to someone if you expand the power of the presidency. people in that office will use it because it's a hard job. >> took over in 2010. they wanted to get rid of earmarks. those little pet projects that people align and get outraged about. putting it into help their their specific district or state. without earmarks, they go over to the executive branch and get spent by nameless bureaucrat

still congress has voted to block an $8100000000.00 saudi arms deal but we expect that donald trump will veto that when he gets to his office in the white house that would be his 3rd b.t.o. of his presidency and can really answer speaking there trump is still addressing his supporters it must be about an hour now thank you very much kimberly how could live for us. and still ahead and i deserve. a judge decides the fate of one of the world's most dangerous criminals the mexican drug kingpin el chapo. and are we heading to a crypto crisis we'll explain why fox finance ministers are cross are worried about facebook's plans for a new currency. and that a slight break in there's a heavy rains across will southern sections of china for the last few hours however this will rain in the forecast and certainly a lot of rain here to the south across the philippines now we're all watching a new tropical storm is called on us it's moving to the north away from the philippines but producing some very heavy amounts of rain national still system is just on the edge of here and then sunday by friday as s

bringing you unfiltered content from congress and beyond. a lot has changed in 40 years but today that big idea is more relevant than ever. on television and online, c-span is your unfiltered view of government. so you can make up your own mind. brought to you as a public service by your cable or atellite provider. common ro khanna is our guest on the communicators. he represents much of silicon valley. congressman khanna, as you well know there are a lot of conversations going on legislatively and in the regulatory communities about some of the tech companies in silicon valley and whether or not they should be more highly regulated. if you could in a general sense before we get into some specific issues, share with us your philosophical thoughts at this time about that. rep. khanna: two things. first, we definitely need well crafted regulation. regulation that protects people's privacy online and then makes sure that we have robust competition. but that does not impede our innovation or competitive advantage over europe or other nations. i

yesterday, the congress and american people heard facts and evidence that congress can and should hold him accountable. impeachable offenses, it is the constitution that entrusts congress with the responsibility of deciding whether to remove the president of the u.s. from office. in the face of evidence of serious misconduct, congress would beon abusing its constitutional discretion in setting a dangerous precedent if it did not begin impeachment inquiry. if the evidence of obstruction of justice and other wrongdoing that robert mueller explained yesterday is not evidence of impeachable evidence, what is? damage when the president have to inflict in order to trigger an impeachment inquiry? my republican colleagues have shown themselves unwilling to hold the president accountable. they believe everything is all over. the evidence in the mueller report special counsel's etestimony yesterday explainin, defending and reaffirming, compel us to do what is right i and necessary. that is to exercise authority and begin impeachment proceedings against trump. nothing less in our democracy is at

criticizing congress.the general view that parties are part of the problem and not the solution will lead us to this quest toward individualization. luciano, tomorrow, he could choose three or four different parties, and it doesn't matter which one he chooses. it will not affect how he is perceived. just as well as if doria changes party, or if bolsonaro changes party tomorrow, he will carry his supporters with him. so in the psdb, it is a problem of how the kitchen works, not basically what food is being served in the restaurant. themselves decide who will emerge with the dish. if it is someone like doria, it might be something good. but if it is somebody else, the power of individualization will still be very strong within the political environment i. paulo: it is something that mauricia i think follows very well. there are political actors in brazil who belong to different logical parties but tend to be more on the centrist side. meet all the time, they talk over time, and they are trying to figure out