justice gorsuch as very few questions. he really just made a statement and remarks in the tenth circuit he frequently would dress up his questions and his statement in question warm. he wasn't shy about giving his view of the case and arguing with the other judges through these rhetorical questions. that's what he did here. missouri has argued that it makes a difference if it's an elected program and not an automatic one and gorsuch says hell is discrimination any less if it's a selective program collects data we tell the difference? one could play with that line forever. you see a theme running through the plain language. once you depart from the plain language then you have to make up where those lines are connected a difficult and create uncertainty. here is his bright line to discrimination on the basis of status of religion. there is no line drawing problem there. we know that's what happened in this case. counsel of missouri we do know that decision was made because it was a church and i suspect that answer probably

great line from gorsuch. no, just to continue to make it up. , justecause it is there because it is not there doesn't mean it shouldn't be there. i agree with you. he agrees with the policy behind -- divided claims are not a good idea. but, it is not there. vein.s on in this everything else goes to the federal circuit. that would be a nice, clean rule, right? it would be a lot easier if we just follow the plaintext of the statute. let me give you a couple of reasons. not reasons. they are in the language. do you have any authority? every court has followed it. kagan has had enough at this point. right. this would be a kind of revolution. it would require overturning a 9-0 recent precedence. kagan is good at getting a laugh. away my justice gorsuch is showing his devotion in plain statutory language and in a case where he challenges a recent unanimous decision over the court. isknow that justice gorsuch not going to be any sort of a wallflower on this court. i will skip chester and look at another plain statut

second reason that it worked was because of gorsuch. because if you had a nominee that was more questionable, then someone could have said, well, we wouldn't mind voting for this nominee or that nominee, but, you know, we're not sure about the existing nominee. but we were able to make an argument that if governor such would be filibustered and stopped on a filibuster, anybody would be stopped on a if pily buster. so, therefore, it was indiscriminate use of a filibuster, and that was the second main condition. reid did it first, gorsuch is the nominee, you have the ingredients for the exercise of the nuclear option which brings us to this position. the senate rules remain 60 votes. but they're an exercise of the constitutional rulemaking power. so is the exercise of the nuclear option, establishing a precedent that contradicts the rule. and the later exercise in time prevails because these things stand on equal footing with one another. so you have a precedent and you have a rule that are contradictory to each other. the rule gives way

gorsuch was a fantastic normmin whether e he has that edge, we'll see. but i think the good news with the filibuster gone, trump can appoint someone very conservative if e he wants to. he doesn't have to worry about winning over moderate democrats. the bad news is that we really have to keep the republican party united. the days when we could count on getting votes from the other side, if it was a qualified nominee, are gone e. our side probably never waged a better campaign for confirmation than this time. in messaging to target democrats and yet you only got four democrats to vote against the filibuster. you would have needed eight to prevent the nuclear option. so we don't have much room to play with. six reported against that. you can be in trouble either way. if the president president were to nominate that wasn't conservative enough, you could hire the situation. i would expect people like mike lee and ted cruz would not probably vote for mieiers and you can certainly have the. opposite problem such that you start to lose collins and people like th

judge gorsuch is a home run.he's begun the deregulatory rollback, the big incomplete, chris, is on capitol hill where he could still get health care reform and tax reform but could get shout-out on both. chris: congresswoman edwards, how do you see the 100 days? >> he hasn't had a significant legislative achievement, health care has gone down twice and it's still a disaster and, you know, this tax plan is not really a tax plan, it's a set of tax bullets, i think, there's a d minus going on in this administration so far. chris: that's better than chuck schumer who gave him a straight f. >> well, you get a plus for signing your name. chris: there you go. the big news as the congresswoman mentioned was that the white house came out, not with really a plan but outline bullet points of the president's tax plan, tax reform plan. here is what candidate trump and treasury secretary mnuchin had to say about the plan before they took office. >> barack obama has -- has doubled during his fairly short period of years, he's d

>> gorsuch. >> gorsuch, okay. >> slow, steady progress. not one word -- >> that's not one word. joe? >> chaos. >> so i'm wondering, certainly the gorsuch nomination, big success, everyone would agree. he has done a lot of the things he said he would do on immigration, environmental regulations. yet his approval ratings are very low. i'm wondering why do you think he hasn't been able to move beyond his base in terms of what people think about him and whether they support him or not? >> he doesn't -- he's not yet learned that governing is different than campaigning. fantastic campaigner as we saw. but he didn't come in with -- he makes these pronouncements but there hasn't been the policy behind them. whether it be syria, which was well received on both sides of the aisle. what's our syria policy? he violated politics 101 by bringing the affordable care act vote or halting that -- >> was that him or paul ryan? >> both. he has to own that too. reince priebus should know better, paul ryan should know better. he has both houses of congress. this is his time to act and we're not seein

gorsuch was nurtured and performed by the federalist society.the am ideologically he is so far to thend i think thee american people will see that ah we see, let me just say chris, you have to let me answer this. >> chris: further to the right then ruth bader ginsburg, conservative presidents can nominate conservative judges and liberal presidents are going to nominate liberal and isn't that what an election is for? >> well both the times said that he would be to the right ofai every judge by thomas, the most conservative judge we've had in history, the post analysis said he would be to the right of that. this is not a mainstream judge. [inaudible] let me finish my comment. he comes off. >> chris: you talk about the new york times who is a former solicitor general, the american bar association said he was in the judicial mainstream. >> they judge by their legal acumen, no one doubts gorsuch legal acumen. but his judicial rulings and all of his comments in his earlier life show that he is far to thet right side and was special-interest, corporate interest, the average middle-class pers

but what i can sit down on the other side is shift the story away from that debate about neil gorsuchs modifications and is seemingly spotless record and so forth into a question about, number one, in the first place their place in the senate as an institution and what had happened to the prior nomination of merrick garland. but number two, a story about the kinds of people and the kinds of causes that gorsuch and his record stands for and stands against, right? i offer no opinion right now on the validity or not of that storytelling. i simply note that that storytelling has been affected because it is applied pressure to make members of the senate in the view of democrats get a spine. what's going to happen now? look, i think this is one of the ways, one of the rules within the broad imperative of changing the game is about sizing the arena. so when i describe the ways in which we in washington reform and gun responsibility have to expand the arena from the cloistered corners of the state legislature where the nra could wield disproportionate control and expand that arena to the enti

the afghanistan, the response in north korea, the budget, and especially because of justice course gorsuch. >> what's significant about the budget? >> that he has broken out of the starvation -- he is not known for being defense spending, he is a budget hawk so he's always got a bigger national security problem. >> i was a little surprised he would undercut defense. it's still not what it needs to be. there isn't enough money but it's going in the right direction. after the shutdown that will be coming. >> chuck schumer want to shut down. he will cause a shut down. his hard-core 10% seems to be fighting. senator schumer is a very smart guy. he knows it was not smart to filibuster neil gorsuch because they reduced the ability to nominate supreme court for 51 votes as opposed to having a filibuster available next time and now it's down to 51 votes. he did not have a good reason to do that. he will be forced by his base to shut down the government. this time they've always shut down when republicans are in the white house spread this time a republican president gets to pick what stays open an

the president selected neil gorsuch who is sow qualified. he kept a promise by putting those individuals out during the campaign and we got him through the senate in a i in a is is systematic way. and the va. if you can't see a doctor because the system is backlogged to that veteran that's an accomplishment. if you are talking about women pursuing an education in stem and engineering or math. howie: let's talk. the you are advise that say donald trump is the least popular president at this stage in modern times. the president tweets fake polls. sean: in some cases these are the same polls that underestimated his win in the first place. if you look at the same polls that didn't understand the makeup of the country that got him 306 electoral votes. you recognize in a lot of cases the polling is misrepresenting a lot of folks out there. his popularity among those hop supported him is at an all-time high. they are misrepresenting -- they are showing the people who support him sill support him, but that number is still skewed. that total populati

he also got supreme court justice neil gorsuch confirmed.as more. >> i donald john trump do solemnly swear -- >> reporter: it began with an inaugural address more sour than soaring. >> this american carnage stops right here and stops right now. >> reporter: what followed, a fractious tenure that occasionally strayed from the facts and put the white house at odds with congress, the courts and at times itself. the president's spokesman sean spicer. >> this was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period. >> reporter: trump's inaugurationro president's twitter account. professional protesters, he said. very unfair. >> ho, ho -- >> reporter: the president spawned more protest with an executive order that tried to ban travel from seven muslim-majority countries. but federal courts blocked it. the order illuminated white house divisions. advisers like steve bannon pushing trump in a nationalist direction, while son-in-law jared kushner and chief of staff reince priebus urged cautious conservatism. >> as of today, we are officially

he discovered neil gorsuch to the highest court in the land.te heavy opposition from democrats, much to the delight of the trump base. the news wasn't as good on one of his other central promises. >> too finally repeal and replace the disaster known as obamacare. >> it was a staple of nearly every trump rally up to election night, but when it came time for houseboat on the republicans plan to shelve the staple of obama's presidency, paul ryan and the gop couldn't deliver. this is one of donald trump's roughest first 100 days in the oval office. >> we are very close and again, i think what will happen is obamacare unfortunately will explode. >> the president may remain true to his word. as republicans keep working beyond the 100 day mark on the repeal and replace that can pass the house and senate. on the homeland security front, the commander-in-chief spent the first 100 days looking to build up what he claims was a depleted military. within a week, two separate bold actions by the president sent a message to the world that america might was ba

and had a chance to weigh in on judge gorsuch's nomination. risking launching a fishing expedition, what can we do to oppose judicial nominations that we find really offensive? and how can we support the representatives such as yourself who most likely would take a strong stand against them? senator murphy: let us take this last one and i will answer them together. so take the last one, a short one, from the overflow room. >> i am from stanford, currently a high school sophomore. i have profoundly admired your commitment to furthering progressive causes in congress, advocating for racial, economic, and social justice, and advancing reforms. i was deeply overjoyed upon seeing your victory in the election against linda mcmahon. she has exercised disregard for the well-being of workers. she has allowed the nation to visualize flagrant intolerance. you publicly endorsed mcmahon, mcmahon, someone who epitomizes the antithesis of those convictions you firmly believe and have vigorously defended since the beginning of your career and subsequently vot

there is a lot at stake and i am hopeful especially with justice gorsuch on the court we will see some of these wrongs righted. >> i suppose we could hope that the brief of the united states, the amicus brief of the united states, would come in on the right side. >> i would certainly hope so. >> professor? >> well, the case involving the florist and photographers in washington and in mexico respectively really trace a fault line that has been in tradition a long time. i would invite you to think back to one of the most famous first amendment cases out there. west virginia board of education versus barnet. the flag salute case. the court after initially ruling that kids could be forced to salute the flag changed course and said if there is any star in our constitution you can't be forced you know to salute and say things you don't want to say. well, i would question then the address designers who refuse to make a dress for ivanka trump. they said look, we mead to be able to stand apart from the zeitgei zeitgeist. we need to be able to express ourselves. under the establishment of the fr

gorsuch, we'll see. i don't know if he has that edge. think the good news is that with the filibuster gone, he can appoint someone very conservative if you wants to. he doesn't have to win over moderate democrats. the bad news is we have to keep the republican party united. the days days when we can count on either party getting votes from the other side are gone. our side has probably never waged a better campaign for supreme court nomination than this time in terms of messaging in the millions of dollars that were spent to target vulnerable democrats and yet he only got four democrats to vote against the filibuster. we would've needed eight to prevent regular option. we don't have much room to play with. i got six republicans voted against. you can be in trouble either way. if the president president were to nominate someone who wasn't conservative enough you can have the harriet meyer situation. i would expect mike lee and ted cruz would not vote for harriet miers and then you can have the opposite problem where you have someone who's

gorsuch everyone agrees on as an accomplishment.as a legislative accomplishment in the building with the big dome behind you? >> i think if you look at the president's speech at the nra last week he mentioned senator warren of massachusetts. as he looks ahead to 2020 he looks ahead also to the rest of this year. he knows there is that bernie strain on the left in the democratic that could be a threat to his re-election hopes. so he is paying attention to it it seems when he goes after different trade deals, talking about tariffs, thinking about breaking up the bank. in spite of awful his legislative challenges and stumbles on health care and the postponement of tax he reformat least for the moment, you see the president trying to make sure that he is not losing the populism, that is the beating heart of his base. >> that base, shrinking base when you talk about tax reform, think about what the president wants to do, in terms of corporate tax reform, we are going to go from 35 to 15%. i double dog dare you to find me a corporation, a

on judicial confirmations, listen, i voted against gorsuch. so i was not on judiciary committee but i voted against gorsuch on the floor. ultimately i think he is going to be the most conservative of all nine. i think he has some radical views on judicial precedent that could really unravel a lot of the protectses that we have against supreme court becoming a wholly, completely independent political entity. the next fight will be even bigger because to the extent that kennedy or ginsberg do create a vacancy, then that's really the swing of the court. we are going to have to have a, just tempest across this country in order to stop a gorsuch-like justice from replacing somebody like kennedy or ginsberg. on mcmahon, yeah, listen, so i, as many of you know, we both supported learned today mcmahon to be sb a administrator. we fought obviously a very tough, hard, campaigns against her. i obviously disagree with her deeply on a lot of views she had. it is question what sort of our test is when we're voting on these nominees. here is the test that i

obviously it was wonderful to have justice gorsuch there. but i was surprised by the lining questioning. suggested we might see a 7-2 decision. and what would this mean for other programs and benefits including safety? they were arguing that if we uphold your line of reasons and line of reasoning what does that mean for the fire department? with a no longer be able to show up at a church? and he also raised about battered women's shelters that provide services to the community but receive some sort of public benefit. from a funding program. what are the implications of that? and then kagan i thought something out was poor for the stable good for our client, she said that this is a clear burden on a constitutional right because religious individuals and groups are barred from competing an otherwise neutral benefit. so i'm very hopeful about what the court will do in this case and the importance of making sure that if you are allowing anyone, any nonprofit to compete for participation in a particular grant program he cannot discriminate agains

just recently, after judge gorsuch's seating in the supreme court, in a seat which i can say i think with very good argument was stolen from president obama's nominee, merrick garland, i don't even know. i haven't had a chance to do research, but i don't even know if you're on the judiciary committee and had a chance to weigh in on judge gorsuch's nomination. but again, risking launching a fishing expedition, what can we as citizens do to oppose judicial nominations we find really offensive, and how can we support the representatives such as yourself who most likely would take a strong stand against them? >> okay, let's take this last one here and i'll answer them together. so take the last one from the short one from the overflow room. >> hi, i'm from stamford. i'm currently a high school sophomore, and i have profoundly admired your commitment to furthering progressive causes, for advocating for equality to promulgating a sensible foreign strategy and military assault rifles. i was deeply overjoyed upon seeing your victory in the 2012 general election against linda mcmahon, an indi

peggy's old boss -- justice gorsuch. president trump aubrey has one. president obama got to. normally you get about two per present. i think he said great 100 days. he has signed 13 congressional review act of laws which not many people know about. congressional review act repeals a regulation within the last 60 legislative days and probably bars the door to the agency coming in. i think he has the cal column fr the post begins seachange. the foreign-policy president trump could not be more different than the foreign-policy a president obama. the eight words i sum up the obama legacy are leading from behind, redline, jd, aleppo and libya. with a strike in surrey, the dispatch in north korea i think trump has had a remarkable successful start with a lot of incredibly big unforced errors including calling a federal judge a so-called federal judge come brainy people in the media as enemies of the state. there's a mistake that been also had a very successful 100 days. he does need to work more on the hill. you're right, the coalition come in wrestling in up and i might be segue o

you can watch it now with chuck schumer as he leads these silly, bizarre the the if against neil gorsuch, a jurist of the greatest order and respect, and schumer acting like a venal, petty pall. >> gorsuch-like appointments will be appointed to replace any justices that retire. lou: in the senate the healthcare bill rests. apparently a number of senators want to begin anew. your thoughts on what we have awaiting us there. >> it's part of the sausage factory. senate pride being what it is. they can't say we'll accept the house bill. they will want to say, it's ours. the president is smart enough to know, get the thing done, spread the credit so the senators want to go on the next rose garden thing? fine. senators like to speak for a long time. lou: i'm sure all the times he was under reagan in the oval office. president reagan had the saying on his desk. you can accomplish much if you don't care who gets the credit. paraphrasing it. that's what he demonstrated. he was embracing the house leadership, the freedom caucus. the tuesday group. everybody represented. >> over the years they disco

you can watch it now with chuck schumer as he leads these silly, bizarre the the if against neil gorsuch, a jurist of the greatest order and respect, and schumer acting like a venal, petty pall. >> gorsuch-like appointments will be appointed to replace any justices that retire. lou: in the senate the healthcare bill rests. apparently a number of senators want to begin anew. your thoughts on what we have awaiting us there. >> it's part of the sausage factory. senate pride being what it is. they can't say we'll accept the house bill. they will want to say, it's ours. the president is smart enough to know, get the thing done, spread the credit so the senators want to go on the next rose garden thing? fine. senators like to speak for a long time. lou: i'm sure all the times he was under reagan in the oval office. president reagan had the saying on his desk. you can accomplish much if you don't care who gets the credit. paraphrasing it. that's what he demonstrated. he was embracing the house leadership, the freedom caucus. the tuesday group. everybody represented. >> over the years they disco

i'd love to get any at all your thoughts on judge gorsuch.also beyond that and we took some of the earlier with federal overreach the importance or the challenges brought upon by the chevron deference. >> i'll tell you, that quote you just mentioned was one that i like because i was a valley where i go for it thought that was incredible comment and a statement on exactly what the situation ought to be. but if the judge does like every decision in there something wrong. and had the courage to say that and mean if it has a history to back it up is exactly the type of judge of what is he on that court. we all know the importance of having the correct type of mindset that looks to the constitution and is a strict constructionist as we move forward, particularly over the next several generations. the erosion suites in its country already have been dramatic, and allowing the court to fade into a more handwringing and we want to do what we think is right versus what the law dictates is certainly a recipe for disaster. i was excited to even have the

three whole votes on gorsuch. you're seeing democrats that go out there every single day and they don't want our democracy to work well then. let's focus on what happened. >> what president of the united states said during the course of the campaign. >> and i have to give the fbi credit. that was so bad what happened originally and it took guts for director comey to make the move that he made in light of the kind of opposition he had with trying to protech her from criminal prosecution. >> i respect the fact that director comey was able to come back after what he did. i respect that very much. good job by the fbi. >> i have respect that the fbi has given it a second chance. as you know the fbi -- and i give them a lot of credit -- because they're fighting forces they're not suppose stod to be fighting. >> i was not his fan but what he did, he brought back his reputation. he brought it back. he's got to hang tough because there's a lot of people want him to do the wrong thing. what he did was the right thing. >> so

both the questions pit on judicial confirmation, listen, i voted against gorsuch on the floor. ultimately, i think he will be the most conservative of all nine. he has radical views on judicial precedent that could really unravel a lot of the productions we have against the supreme court becoming a completely independent political entity. and the next fight will be even bigger because to the extent that kennedy or ginsburg do create a vacancy, then that is really the swing of the court, and we are going to have to have a tempest across this country in order to stop a gorsuch-like justice from replacing somebody like kennedy or ginsburg. on mcmahon, listen, as many of you know, we supported linda mcmahon to be the administered -- administrator. i think we fought, obviously, a very tough, hard campaign against her. i obviously disagree with her deeply on a lot of reviews she had. it is a question of what our test is when we are voting on these nominees. here is the test i have chosen to employ. i'm not but a vote for nominees for people that i believe are truly radical -- going t

outside government without a party label who has demonstrated the expertise necessary to prosecute gorsuch challenging situations as this. put -- to prosecute such challenging situations as this. try to stop this or

outside government without a party label who has demonstrated the expertise necessary to prosecute gorsuch challenging situations as this. put -- to prosecute such challenging situations as this. try to stop this or short-circuit by dismissing mr. comey is ineffective in terms of serving justice and, sadly, is a sad reflection on american ideals and values. mr. bennet: thank you. mr. president, as you know, last night, president trump fired f.b.i. director james comey. he did this in the middle of an active f.b.i. investigation into possible links between the trump campaign, trump associates and the russian government. this action should worry every member of the senate. and i know it worries the people we represent. my office has been flooded with calls since this decision became public. americans are asking why this firing happened now, why the firing happened at all, and they are right to ask. officially, president trump said the f.b.i. director's dismissal was necessary to restore, quote, the public trust and confidence in the f.b.i. that is laughable. anybody who knows director comey

outside government without a party label who has demonstrated the expertise necessary to prosecute gorsuch challenging situations as this. put -- to prosecute such challenging situations as this. try to stop this or short-circuit by dismissing mr. comey is ineffective in terms of serving justice and, sadly, is a sad reflection on american ideals and values. mr. bennet: thank you. mr. president, as you know, last night, president trump fired f.b.i. director james comey. he did this in the middle of an active f.b.i. investigation into possible links between the trump campaign, trump associates and the russian government. this action should worry every member of the senate. and i know it worries the people we represent. my office has been flooded with calls since this

i don't know what the meter says right now about gorsuch becoming a justice of the supreme court. i guess it's still pretty high. and part of the challenge for you is to find victory or defeat not necessarily in whether he ultimately gets pushed through but what broader avenues of organization had opened up, while broader stories can be told and that they see this not some inside baseball play for the u.s. senate but as their flight to and if that works and that happens, even a successful move neil gorsuch on the court could yield positive benefits for activists like you. >> great, we will come back to the front. >> i love your film about inclusion. i find it some parts to total up those in color and i'm wondering if you could talk more about that. how citizens have the right to have easy access to bathrooms or if you don't think that black lives matter has a break, how do you suggest we engage those who refuse to engage? it's not just in state government, i don't recognize you or your rights and privileges and how do i engage in those powers. >> mark, thank you for that question

host: when you hear that judge gorsuch sitting in his nomination hearing say that the court is not political, he's not political and you think back to felix frankfurter and louis brandeis and for that mat errol i haver wendall holmes, what's your reaction? guest: holmes was the least political. he wasn't a political animal at all. he didn't read newspapers. his only source of news was the new republic and the reason why, he admired herbert and walter and felix frankfurter. other than that, he didn't care about news and didn't care much about politics but frankfurter and brandeis were political animals. i think i would separate politics from constitutional values. all justices have to come to their position with constitutional values. host: in the case of frankfurter how close was he to f.d.r.? frankfurter is and exercised extrajudicial ctivity. today would be considered a gross violation of the separation of powers. host: you mentioned the new republic. who started it and what year? >> herbert crowley started it in 1914 in conjunction with the people who lived in the house. felix frankfurter

we did confirm neil gorsuch to the supreme court.ppened. >> neil: on these types of matters, be careful what you share, especially with the russians. what do you think? >> this is the biggest job of the world. anybody has to grow into it. look, we had a false step around the syrian refugee issue. right behind that five days later, we had neil gorsuch's nomination. so this is a president that has surprised people time and time again and will continue to do that. >> neil: something is going on there where there's leaks. a lot of democrats dismiss the leaker thing. it's a real problem in this administration. i don't know how many were in the room at the time with the two top russian officials. there couldn't have been that many. if you look around and count, someone leaked something, right? >> it's an issue. we take this seriously in the senate. we have to treat this classified information very carefully. the white house is committed to the same thing, this is a president that is beginning to reassert the national interests of america.

judge when you hear gorsuch sitting in his nomination hearing say that the court is not political, hes not political, and then you think back to felix frankfurter and louis brandeis and oliver wendell holmes, what is your reaction? holmes was the least political. he didn't read newspapers. his only source of news was the new republic. the reason he read "the new republic" was because he admired croley and lippmann and frankfurter. other than that, he didn't care about news or politics. but frank for an brandeis were real political animals -- frankfurter and brandeis were real local animals. i think all justices have certain constitutional values. brian: in the case of felix frankfurter, how close was he to fdr? mr. snyder: very. both brandeis and frankfurter are engaged in extra visual activity. they were still active in political affairs in the executive branch while sitting --the court, which coul grosstoday would be a violation of the separation of powers. herbert croley started it in 1914. really in conjunction with people who lived in the house, felix frankfurter who was one of t

. >> ben: the number one accomplishment, neil gorsuch is talented. >> eric: a lot of people voted forse he was going to nominate a conservative. >> ben: he lived up to that promise. it's a new world now. we have the house passing trumpcare, medicaid, medicare cuts. i think when he goes to the heartland, he's going to see what a lot of these republicans are seeing when they go back to their districts. it may not be the friendly crowd he was seeing. a lot of middle americans aren't feeling as though he is supporting -- >> eric: middle americans are feeling better about the econom economy. stock market, labor market, housing some are at 16 year highs. stock market is at all-time highs. you are from wisconsin. what do what do you think wiscon feels? >> ben: i think the economic success, okay, that's obviously a good thing. going back to health care, pre-existing conditions, things like that, that really matters to people in the fact that they kept, basically it's a 30% tax on young people they don't get health care. that's exactly what barack obama did come up for the most part. there's a

. -- don't be somebody's lapdog gorsuch of aunt. -- or sycophant. as we hearjoin us from business leaders and white house officials. 27, 29 whichy 20, is memorial day,nd saturday, ju 3 >> saturday on booktv, live all day coverage of the ethers berg maryland festival. 10:00 a.m.. ." t be cleaver family discussing herer book "the imaginary of war." and "reagan rising: the decisive ." rs and sidney blumenthal author of wrestling with angels." and, a book on the jersey nalhe, a missi offir in the pific and t quest bring him he. watch all d saturday r the gaithersburg book festival on 10:00 a.m. ing at pelosi weighscy in on allegations that president trump gave information to the russian foreign minister during a meeting last week. she also spoke about republican efforts to replace and repeal the affordable care act. forspoke at the center american progress ideas conference. we will also hear from former reagan administration national security adviser susan rice and amy klobuchar. [indiscernible conversation]

one is we take up the nominatior of president nominees like we did judge gorsuch to the united statesourt. we did that for his cabinet in the like. there's two choices there, if yes or no. we decided together that all of the president's cabinet nominees and all of the judges will get an up or down vote. we've eliminated the so-called filibuster with the 60 vote requirement with regard to nominations. you can't offer an amendment to a nomination, you can't save it in order to try to develop this. i think there's a good argument that we should never have headed down the road of a filibuster of nominees. we need to get a majority vote, if they do, bill be confirmed. legislation is fundamentally of different. we have 535 members of congress, all of us come from a different experience, different points of view. again, the founding fathers made it hard for us to build sufficient consensus in order to for us to govern this big country of ours, some 320 million people. what they understood fundamentally is the only way that happens is when we are forced to govern by consensus. that is build s

look at how he was able to stall merit garland forever and get gorsuch on the supreme court. there are meetings going on about what this bill will look like. yeah, there will be a lot of policy differences. what happens with planned parenthood funding, what happens with the medicaid expansion. but my money in some ways is on mitch mcconnell and getting this done. >> here's three things we know are going to happen. some of them are outside of the senators control and they're going to be watching them for signals. number one, they're going home for a week and see how much they get yelled at. see what the passion is from the grass roots. both the activist grass roots on the right and the larger grass roots of their districts. are people passionately upset about this, are they supportive of this. what is the vibe they're going to get. number two, the cbo is going to score this bill some weeks after the fact and that's going to give people at least in some guidelines of what are the estimates of how this will affect people. number three, the senate's going to write a bill. the sep