what did congress really do? what it shows is that there are a lot of really good challenges on the home front. by turning the american economy into a giant war machine. congress really was the place where we figured out how to work through these difficulties. the massive inflation, the rationing. that is really something in the bones of america, the need to see what the government is doing as fair. not just as right or wrong, but fair. congress was the one religious worker the difficult issues. our going to deal with the challenges caused the inflation? how are we going to make sure that the military isn't heading war profiteering? they therefore got the american people to trust the war effort much more. host: and how were they able to do that? guest: right. ". that is the central virtue of multiple congress. congress has many members and they can openly fight with each other. sometimes that sounds scary to people. sounds like everyone should just figure out a way to get along. we are all americans, we should so

what do i want congress to do? i think congress is so broken.he government is broken and the people are not educated to think critically or understand how our government works. host: we will go on to dan in south dakota. this is dan in south dakota on the independent line. caller: i just want to let you know you are the best on c-span. you are the reason i listen all the time. write these down congress people we need to do four things. first of all we need to introduce a bill immediately to change how our government and our intelligence agencies deal with classified information. let's wake up we have a 21-year-old national guardsmen and ex-president some vice presidents and current presidents walking around with classified information or having it stored in their beach homes. that should not happen. number two, we need to get an immigration bill. that's the only thing biden hasn't passed yet. that would help effects how fentanyl and all those other drugs are coming across. focus in and hone in on that. number three, we need to raise the debt cei

and, we do not have any replacement for congress if congress does not do that. sort of fights on social media. guess what, they do not resolve anything and they are not going to lead towards a compromised mindset. nobody has to compromise on social media. but our representatives should feel the pressure to compromise and work through issues, to say what can i give you for exchange on what i care about? let's take each other's concerns seriously and work from there. to my mind my that did not happen with covid. it is a shame. we have these massive institutional failures. and how much reform have we gotten? none, basically. host: you end the book with an open letter to congress. explain why. guest: well, it fits nicely with dave's question. most americans are not highly tuned into questions of government organization, and frankly they are not going to be. it feels a little bit in the weeds, however you want to say it. but we are not going to get a grassroots movement for having congress operate differently, in my opinion. we need members themselves to say that thi

you also outline ways steps where congress steps that congress can take. one is the filibuster. one is one is the debt. you have eight worthy efforts. can you kind of show us or tell some of those eight worthy efforts that they need to take to overcome where we are now? and are you hopeful? are you optimistic? i mean, there are days when i am when i see i don't see any hope the congress is going to is ever going to get out of this cycle. well, i'm not as pessimistic as you are. i think there are ways to get out of it, but it's it's going to be a long effort, a long, long term effort. what's a worthy step? well, these were the efforts that i've discussed in here really are more history. i talked about the different things that we tried to during the 30 years i was there in the senate and things that got in the way, the impediments i discussed five impediment is that that got in the way us doing what we needed do or should have done in some of these areas. take climate change for an example, congress has not even yet, even though we've passed a significant bill, congress passed a

we are talking about a situation in congress where congress is trying — congress where congress is tryingthe budget. — administration, controlling the budget. it was controlled directly by the head of congress. so we are not talking about... — congress. so we are not talking about... we have to take out the ghosts of the house. we don't — the ghosts of the house. we don't see _ the ghosts of the house. we don't see a big reason for more or less — don't see a big reason for more or less corruption. we think it is a _ or less corruption. we think it is a separate issue. just or less corruption. we think it is a separate issue.— is a separate issue. just a cuick is a separate issue. just a quick word- _ is a separate issue. just a quick word. sure. - is a separate issue. just a quick word. sure. a - is a separate issue. just a quick word. sure. a big i quick word. sure. a big problem? _ quick word. sure. a big problem? a _ quick word. sure. a big problem? a big - quick word. sure. a big | problem? a big problem quick word. sure. a big - problem? a big problem in brazil that _ problem? a big

congress has done this under federalists and republicans. congress did act in 2001.hey voted in the aftermath of 9/11 for a hastily worded authorization. but then the questions of oversight, and trying to hone it in, where congress -- and thereby think you can escape accountability. but if we're forcing men and women to risk their lives, what has gotten us to a place where congress seems willing to act? it has been 20 years of pain and lessons learned. you are talking about those in the panel today. those have been felt by members of congress, too. the trumpet strike on soleimani was pivotal because while it will supported the strike, the assertion that this was justified by the iraq authorization made people feel like, that wasn't what it what it was about it all. these authorizations are capable of abuse. one of the reasons we are here is biden. biden is not hostile to the notion. when i worked on this, they were not hostile, but they were not helpful. the trump administration was hostile to the idea of repealing aumf. people work on other things. biden was a 36-ye

so congress is out of session. what is lincoln supposed to do when he does not have all the powers of fighting a war listed under the constitution? this is really tricky right you rely on congress for example to declare war. and if you declare war as the president, are you violating the constitution? this is a real question. so lincoln is going to call a special session of congress. they're going to meet in july 1861, but they don't mean until july and so lincoln has several months where he has to figure out what to do. and one particular constitutional issue that comes up during these few months is having to do with something called the writ of habeas corpus. how many of you have heard of the writ of habeas corpus before we've heard of it, but it's kind of a tricky concept right? so let's go over what it is because it's really something that we as a members of a free society hold dear. we think it's really important. rid of habeas corpus is a legal action that requires a person under arrest to be brought before a

congress. we cannot guarantee the result of future congresses. that is why budgets that are balanced out that are five or 10 years do not really carry that much impact. they just do not. what is important are the 12 appropriation bills that will be presented this summer, that congress has not done for many years now to say, this is exactly what we are going to fund in government. this is the level with which we are going to fund them at. then, we are going to send those bills to the senate. that is what counts. i will also tell you and the listeners need to remind themselves of this, lower taxes stimulate the economy without devaluing the dollar. that is critically important. while the democrats have tried to argue against this for quite some time, every time we see the taxes are reduced, we see revenues get increased for the federal government. when the tax cuts and jobs act were passed, what we saw is the revenue from the federal government in 2019 was at $4 trillion. now, we are going to rec

s lack of voting representation in this congress and congress' plenary authority over d.c. are the antithesis of democracy the legislative history and merits of d.c.'s comprehensive policing and justice reform amendment act of 2022, which is the subject of this disapproval resolution, should be irrelevant since there is never justification for congress nullifying legislation enacted by the district of columbia, but i would like to set the record straight. d.c.'s comprehensive policing and justice reform amendment of 2022 is consistent with house democrats' george floyd justice of policing act. president biden's executive order on policing, and police accountability and transparency legislation enacted by dozens of states, both red and blue, to improve public safety and public trust after the murder of george floyd. d.c.'s comprehensive policing and justice reform amendment act of 2022 would, among other things, make it easier to fire officers for misconduct, prohibit the hiring of officers with prior misconduct, require the release of the names and body worn camera recordin

congress was a much smaller operation. committees have always been with congress. the house has always had the senate's always had them. why so? as you mentioned, committees have really been essential institutions in congress. its inception and the way that i like to think about it is that committees exist because congress is a huge institution and it has to deal with a huge number of issues. as we all know, watching it. and so it needs to delegate responsibility and, ownership in some way. and does this through committees. committees are really where it delegates responsibility to look more deeply and take ownership of different issues committees are where members can special eyes in a topic and take ownership it and deliberate and understand policies more deeply. committees also a way then of decentralizing power within the chamber and more legislators to be involved in different ways in. the process again just like many other big organizations that we might of and in terms of how committees actually function in the proc

steve: in the united states, atf role is defined by congress, the laws that congress passes. there is a lawn now that makes it unlawful to have a firearms registry in the united states. and our tracing is limited by law to crime gun. to answer your question, the law which we in law enforcement take as it is given to us and follow talks about focusing on crime guns. we do other things besides the two things i told you. one of the things we do is, we have responsibility to implement the statute as congress passes them. that requires us to make sure firearms dealers in the united states across the country are actually following the rules. in extreme cases, bringing action to revoke their license. that is a part of in strategy on this. it happens -- it has to start the slowdown of the movement of firearms from the lawful side to the unlawful side. leigh ann: it's congress prohibiting some of the things atf can and should be doing to prevent gun violence? steve: we are in law enforcement at atf. the administration, the president, the attorney general have been very vocal about som

that is congress's job. inongress in 1952, they took outhe very words the vernment now asks the court to write in. solicits and assis. in 1986 congress took out the quired intent. the government has cited no pace at which congrs s used the term encouraged and induced alone to std r solicitation or aiding and abetting. second, even if you confuse the statute alited to solicitation or di and abetting, the court shouldot create a new category of unprotectedpeech, namely, criminal solicitation of civil law violations. the historical roots of that exception are limited to solicitation of crime and for good reason. if the justification for treating speech as categorically unprotected ishait is integral to conduct the governntan punish, tn, the speech cannot be punished re harshly than that conduct. so, the court has consistently resisted prior invitations to expand categories of unprotected speech and it should do the se here. otherwise, congress and the states will be free without any first amendment scrutiny to

he first amendment in any way limit ability of congress to criminalize the solicitation of congress that not itself criminal? we can think of conduct that regula violations, for ex speech rments, regulatoryvisions that limit speech in some way. did the first amendment allow somebody to engage in the conduct of crime under all circumstances? writes a coue inciples would come into play. i will tellouirsthand i do not think the court has ever spoken tth. thcot has spoken to this case -- in casesikwilliams and pittsburgh press sing attempts to salute --olicit or induce illegal transactis e outside the protection of the first amendment. to say anything beyond that would be new. i think the things, the prciples that might come into play, ifouad a law that targeted just a speech that did not tart soliciting conduct, ermight be differentsss that would come into play. that is not a concern here because everybody agrees the statute gives encouraging or ducing through speech or conduct. i can imagine, though i am not re that this is in the first amendment, but, you can deposit really absurd hypothe

guest: it has been sent to congress and several committees. i believe some have credit but i am not certain -- may have read it but i am not certain. host: richard, republican mine, georgia. c-span.org my question -- caller: my question is about the letter prior to the election where they said that the laptop was disinformation. now as been confirmed that antony blinken started that letter and after the election, he became secretary of state. my question is is biden compromised? action acne blinken be impeached -- should antony blinken be impeached? guest: in terms of that letter that intelligence officials were before the election, that was specifically about that laptop is part of the investigation. as far as we know right now, the investigation and charges he is facing not specifically relate to the contents of that laptop. i do not have that much information on the laptop. host: on the waste investigation, has hunter biden met with that committee? guest: the way it works generally is the team at the irs kamil unit and the fbi agent seem to

there was a fund out there that if a member of congress. was accused of a sexual harasser moment or there they would be able to make it go away by being able to settle with with taxpayers dollars, with the accuser and make the issue go away. but i authored that and i passed that bill. and it's no longer they can no longer use taxpayer dollars to do that. and i think it's helpful to have due diligence if you are innocent, then make it make your voice heard. protest that innocence and have your due diligence go out and defend yourself. speaking of the bill, you just mentioned, as as i'm sure pay quite a bit of attention to, there have been quite a few metoo moments on capitol hill as since you left congress. why do you think that this issue became its prominent other topic as it did when it did, considering how long it existed? well, i was actually in congress when a lot of that was out. so many. i just i just did. it comes from two things. one, people may be getting a little too comfortable, maybe getting a little too a little too confident.

not only in this congress but the previous congresses when we attempted to advance is very important measure.s what we have in front of us right now senate resolution for an amendment to add equal rights amendment to our constitution. it is pretty simple mr. president. equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the united states or by any state or is as simple as that, that's it. that's the full substance of the equal rights amendment referred to as the era. the it's already a u protection under certainly the everything is not on the basis of that doesn't and history of the era was first proposed back in 19203, three years after ratificationee 50 years later te era finally passed congress. it is signed by president carter in 1972 with the seven year deadline for ratification. thirty-five states move quickly answered including the state of alaska within that deadline. it wasn extended once in 1982 to give the remaining states more time to consider it. but momentum waned as other things took precedence for the era did not go away though. nevada, illinois, virgi

in the 117th congress. i come out of here looking at some areas of which we can work collectively on. and i urge you to join me to let's talk and work so that we can repeal and replace the 2001 aumf. with a narrower and time-bound scope. the issues we are discussing here today are pressing and relevant, but stls a better approach -- but there is a better approach. i look forward to undertaking that approach with both my colleagues on the floor and all of my colleagues in a bipartisan basis. and hope that we will have this conversation and work closely together. let me also make a correction i gave credit to general kelly on the statement of if we don't put more money into diplomacy, we have to spend more on bullets. that was general james mattis. i want to make sure i give proper credit to the proper person in our military. let's work together. i think we have a real window of opportunity. just listening to the president of south korea to just gave a wonderful speech here, he talked about how we won world w

it is long overdue for congress to act. thank you. >> mr. president. >> . the senator from maryland. >> i want to thank her for her leadership. this is a bipartisan effort this joint resolution that we have and it's been what the equal rights amendment was about. it started with action in the congress and strong bipartisan support for the resolution for equal rights discrimination based upon the sex in our constitution. it was passed by the house and senate with bipartisan majorities. the states ratification process i can tell you about the one in maryland that i was part of when i was in the house of delegates into state legislature when we ratified the equal rights amendment it was a strong bipartisan support and i am proud of today that i'm joining with senator murkowski for the equal rights amendment to be ratified so this is a bipartisan ueeffort. i hope our colleagues will not filibuster it and i understand the concern. this will be our first vote in the senate on the resolution. the house already passed it into previous congress is and i know our col

in the 117th congress. come out of here looking at some areas of which we can work collectively on. and i urge you to join me to let's talk and work so that we can repeal and replace the 2001 aumf. with a narrower and time-bound scope. the issues we are discussing here today are pressing and relevant, but stls a better approach -- but there is a better approach. i look forward to undertaking that approach with both my colleagues on the floor and all of my colleagues in a bipartisan basis. and hope that we will have this conversation and work closely together. let me also make a correction i gave credit to general kelly on the statement of if we don't put more money into diplomacy, we have to spend more on bullets. that was general james mattis. i want to make sure i give proper credit to the proper person in our military. let's work together. i think we have a real window of opportunity. just listening to the president of south korea to just gave a wonderful speech here, he talked about how we won world war

we used to give one chamber of congress, congress, to one party, the presidency to another and so on. and then meanwhile, the the courts sort of persist in sort of like averaging of which party has been in power over time. but yeah, i mean, it's certainly good mobilizer to say that every election is the most important and and i think that, you know, you know, there's something to be said for the fact that the presidency has grown and the government has grown. so control the government is a higher stakes proposition. and so we would need some sort of reforms to pare that back, you know, starting with putting more power in congress which is i know something you've all has worked on. you know, we have institutions, the filibuster, which are intended to prevent dramatic change. those are trying to be exploded, you know, by partizans. and i at some point will be. but i guess i don't have a good answer because, you know, people do have a point. elections are very important. so i guess this gets back for me to the distinction between, panic and worry. i don't think it makes to panic about pr

>> as mandated by congress fear merit neutral and congress decides which investments to take that it is based on disclosure so that. >> so investors can decide that you believe it should be a part of the decision-making process? >> what we know today is many hundreds of companies are making disclosures with regards to climate risk and investors across the spectrum are currently using the climate risk disclosures and investment decision. >> you believe that should be the guiding principle how people invest? >> it is currently happening in the us and around the globe so we have a role to bring consistency and comparability with disclosures that are already happening. >> does the sec deserve any culpability in the collapse of spx quick. >> a number of entities in the cryptofield are noncompliant with you as large as adopted by congress over the years and we will be the vigorous cop on the beat. >> that's not what i asked does the sec deserve any culpability for the collapse of spx? yes or no quick. >> when people are defrauding the public we go after them. >> you are not answering my qu

this shows a great contrast to the difference to the last congress to this. one being much more productive. two, showing up for work. three, what the majority selected for their h.r. 1. the democrats picked a bill in h.r. 1 to protect themes to make it easier for them to be re-elected. we picked h.r. 1, the lower energy cost act, how could we help the american public lower the energy costs for them. not only did we have four democrats vote with us but we continue to move that bill forward. we created the select committee on china to allow america to speak with one voice. we had more than 146 democrats join with us. just last week a number of democrats joined us as the reagan library meeting with the president of taiwan. we brought the sale of oil from they the strategic petroleum reserve to china, 113 democrats joined with us. we passed legislation to nullify d.c.'s soft on crime criminal code. even though the president at the beginning said he would veto it, he ended up signing it. we passed legislation to end the pandemic. 11 democrats joined with us. again

he dissolved congress dissolving congress as an extreme act. he did, he play into their hand by making himself look like the extremist very by giving them probably never actually he never was actually able to dissolve congress. he made that order and he was swiftly carried off to jail. never to the release. of course. now he's being held in pre trial detention. that order was never realized. he ordered a number of other things, including a state of emergency, and he said that they would reorganize some of the country's main judicial institutions. none of that ever happened. he was just immediately jail, so they were planning on taking him one way or another that day or inevitably. but you know, this might be the products of receiving poor advice. he was going to figures like luis mago, the secretary general of the organization of american states, and he was also allying with some right wing politicians within the country and abandoning his own political party. so this woman, deena de warranty, who is now the president of, of peru who used to be

congress has to act. it says in the constitution that congress has the power to borrow. the deadline was meant to simplify that. it obviously [indiscernible] host: to put a finer point on it, mr. secretary, did you at any point propose minting a trillion dollar coin to president obama? mr. lew: i believe that any of the fringe ideas were very risky. i'm not going to say with absolute certainty what you can and cannot do. i wouldn't recommend taking those risks. host: we believe that there. any other questions in the room? to the front. >> hi, senator. and it secretary. one comment, senator, that you made, made me nervous that representatives were thinking this is deja vu. my question is, are representatives being too complacent now because that is the attitude? sen. portman: well, it depends on which body and what side of the aisle we're talking about. republicans are focused on the fact that the administration won't even negotiate a way out of this to have some sort of proposals to deal with the underlying problem. they have put ideas out there you should know. they fee

, from -- from the halls of congress. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> first lady jill biden previewed the upcoming state dinner to honor south korea's president during his visit to the u.s. this week. she was joined by the social secretary and guest chef. there are plans to mix korean influences into the dishes. this is 15 minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen, please

>> as mandated by congress we are a neutral. investors get to decide which investments they take but it's based on full, fair, truthful disclosures. so that's our remit. >> so investors get to decide but you believe esg should be a component of that decision-making process? >> what we know today is that many, hundreds of companies, are making disclosures with regard to climate risk. and r investors across the spectrum from small investors to large are currently using those climate risk disclosures in their investment decisions. >> do you believe that should be kind of the guiding principle of how people invest? >> it's currently happening in the u.s. and around the globe, and so what we have role than to do is to help bring some consistency and comparability and disclosures that are already happening. >> does he sec deserve any culpability in the collapse of stx? >> a number of entities in the crypto field are noncompliant with u.s. law as adopted by congress over the yearsge and we are going to be vigorous cop on the beat to sp