yarmuth: thanks for that question. a couple of things i am very confident of -- one is you would see a lot more attention paid to the revenue side of the budget. we would look very carefully at the trillion dollars a year in tax expenditures, many of which provide no public benefit. i think we would review the new tax law, and it would be a significant number of changes there. we have already seen just in the last few days announcements from the treasury as to how much the deficit has increased just in the last couple of months, and it's largely due to a reduction in revenue. republicans while they have been in charge have looked exclusively not just at the expense side of the budget but pretty much just at the domestic expense side, and we would be looking, i think, much more carefully at the defense budget and things like the operations account, which is kind of a slush fund, and i think we would be looking very carefully at a lot of the programs that represent significant investments in our future economy on the edu

yarmuth: i love louise. that saddens me greatly. we knew she had hit her head or something and was having some problems. i'm so sorry she has passed. she is a native kentucky and we shared that. we shared bourbon. we shared love for the commonwealth and a love of congress. my chief of staff was her chief of staff. that's a tragic loss for the congress. she was a great, great number and great american. susan: as the lead democrat on the house rules committee, a very familiar figure. , rissman, thank you for being our guest on "newsmakers" this week. on march 5, you follow the pieces of democrats don't have the energy after the last standoff to be really an opposition to this spending bill. did pennsylvania 18 change that at all? momentum mr. debonis: i don't think we're seeing that necessarily. i think that the fights at this point -- they are looking to have those fights in the balance -- balance of the spending bill on things like abortion and homeland security. there just is not seem to be the bandwidth or the strategic desire to

yarmuth: i think you will see over the next few months. would bet a significant majority of our democratic congressional candidates across the country will be talking about medicare for everyone. i think if we are able to take over the majority, we will see a series of hearings in the house to actually analyze the feasibility of medicare for everyone. one of the things i think is kind of crazy looking at what happened over the last few months is every time republicans do something to sabotage the affordable care act, they are basically making single-payer or medicare for everyone that much more inevitable and that much closer. if you eliminate, as they have done, the individual mandate -- there are proposals to eliminate -- theyoyer mandate basically returned us almost as closely as possible to the situation prior to the four double care act, which was and will be a disaster and will absolutely rampant the pressure for the only alternative there is to the affordable care act, and that is medicare for everyone. i do not think that is a horr

yarmuth. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank both of the witnesses also. i have this knack of asking questions i don't expect a certain answer to. it is curious, something might be useful is if we asked cbo to as a matter of course do a score on an enacted piece of legislation every two years or so. that above some level, $5 billion, hypothetically, some level, with the aca we would have a score every two years what it would like for the next 10. we obviously don't want to add too much to cbo's plate but since they have done a lot of the incremental work may not require that many additionalwo resources. ii threw that out, mr. davis. how do you react to that? >> you are talking about reas assessment of something enacted into law, to keep track of what it said, how far off the spending it was, that can be a tricky thing to do and almost impossible. depends on changes you enacted. if you make changes to existing program and the changes get all wrapped up what exists under current law it may be difficult to parse out those changes versus what occurs under curr

congressman kentucky john yarmuth about her. mr. yarmuth: we knew she hit her head and was having problems. i am sorry she passed. she is a native kentuckian. we shared that. we shared bourbon. we share a love for the commonwealth. and the love for congress and she's been a -- as a matter of fact, my chief of staff was her chief of staff. so that's a tragic loss for the congress. she was a great, great member and great american. >> and you can see our entire interview with congressman yarmuth this weekend here on c-span. he is the ranking member of the budget committee. he talks about efforts to write an omnibus spending bill to keep the government open. he's on "newsmakers" this week 10k a.m. on nd sunday. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979 c-span was created by a public service by america's cable television companies and today we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress. the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c., and around the country. c-span is brought to you by yo

yarmuth. >> thank you very much, mr. cha. i join you in welcoming our esteemed witnesses today, for me cbo directors dr. rivlin and dr. you have both played key roles in the permitting the mission congress set for cbo to be a independent nonpartisan source of information and analysis. the truth is congress simply could not function effectively without cbo's budget estimates and analyses. we make decisions that impact our entire economy and every family in america, and those decisions must be informed by sound data and evidence. we created cbo so we were not forced to rely on analysis of the executive branch or outside organizations, information which reflected their own political agenda. we still need cbo to be that unbiased scorekeeper. cbo does not make recommendations. they do not take into account politics or ideology. they deal in numbers and analysis only. the only agenda tab is maintaining their independent respected voice, and i appreciate the hard work both of our witnesses have done

yarmuth: well, i'm

. >> congressman john yarmuth, who is apparently wearing what he's going to wear next saturday. >> todaye st. patrick's day, i'm going to walking in that today, glad you got the connection. >> thank you so much. >>> president trump is trying to stop this democrat from going to congress, coming up. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. you know what's not awesome? gig-speed internet. when only certain people can get it. let's fix that. let's give this guy gig- really? and these kids, and these guys, him, ah. oh hello. that lady, these houses! yes, yes and yes. and don't forget about them. uh huh, sure. still yes! xfinity delivers gig speed to more homes than anyone. now you can get it, too. welcome to the party. >>> welcome back, everyone. aim alex witt at msnbc world headquarters in new york. happening now, some last minute campaigning for tuesday's special

chairman, and you were yarmuth for leading this efforts. i think this is something that's important at this point in time. to my eye there are two distinct problems at that stand out, one is the appropriations process and the sort of shutting of the government brinksmanship and how do you get back 0 what was intended and the second was entitlement spending and i don't think it makes sense to rewrite the entire process as the doctor recommended. but focus on two things where you have to make it better politics to get the appropriations done and get entitlement spending on a sustainable track. that's really it. >> you made a comment a minute ago about pay-go and tweak to the '74 process. i label it or categorize it as giving first aid to a process when the patient really needs some major surgery. i think we're now at that stage where we may not have a terminal case although the glide path demonstrates otherwise, but we don't need a bandaid anymore, we don't need first aid, we need some kind of major circumstance, do we not? >> the outcomes ha

host: john yarmuth of kentucky, he is our guest on newsmakers. it is at 10:00 a.m. eastern time .ou can listen to it on the free c-span radio app and online at c-span.org. theelcome the graduate of u.s. military academy at west point and the wilson center. let's talk about the situation in russia and the poisoning of that russian double agent and his daughter. what do we know about the nerve agent? guest: the nerve agent was produced during the soviet era. it is a reference to the products themselves that were put together to create the poison. it is a standard nerve agent that inhibits nerve -- inhibits brain activity. host: do you have any doubt that putin was behind this effort? confidentcan be especially when you have statements coming from the united states, france, germany and the united kingdom condemning this and say that they believe it was led by the russian leadership. condemnation,t what will that mean for russia? does it make any difference for vladimir putin? guest: i don't think it does. the intended assassination, any ifders on the road that even , thatraitor compa

thank you, ranging member yarmuth. i'm a new member to congress. this is my first term. so i'm going to call this for what it is. there's very few democrats up here. so let's just call this what it is. it's a partisan hearing to try to discredit the cbo because recent scores about the affordable care act did not yield the type of result that the majority party wanted. that's what this is. let's just call it what it is. certainly if it would have yielded a different outcome, you wouldn't be here today. so since you are here, i will ask you a few questions. but let's just call this what it is. what do you see as the biggest threats to the cbo's ability to fulfill its mission? today? >> well, i would differ with your characterization of this hearing. i've looked -- i heard the washington c-span, the first one, and have looked through the others, and i don't think that the committee has in general been out to get cbo. they've been trying to understand what cbo does and how they do it and how it can be improved. that's the spirit in which i would answer your question. the par