tv Senator Harry Reid on Donald Trumps Candidacy CSPAN March 17, 2016 8:00pm-8:53pm EDT
>> good morning, everybody, and happy st.~patrick's day. we're very honored to have you all here for a very important event and remarks. and exactly what is happening in our politics today. just before president obama's second inauguration the new thew yorker poshed a headline: republican accuse obama of using position as president to lead country. and i think that just about sums up where we have been the last several years. year after year in which republican politics have been a contest for who can say no the fastest, the loudest, and the longest. with no record for reason or the best interests of the country. we have seen that over the last 24 hours in response to the
supreme court. truthfully, we have seen that the moment the american people elected barack obama, republican leaders made it their mission to block everything, literally offering the president propose it. they misled the american people about his policies and over the last year we have seen incredibly heated rhetoric around the president and the country's future. today, donald trump is the republican party's front-runner, and people are surprised that hateful and divisive rhetoric has contributed to a candidacy that mirrors all of those themes. we are particularly honored to have senator reid here to discuss this topic and many more. senator reid has been fighting for the middle class, working to help all americans on almost
every issue i have worked on. he works on policies help hard-working families achieve the american dream, working to keep immigrant families together, protect can our environment for future generations. he has been an incredible voice for all of us, into i'm honored to have him here to talk about what is happening to the mesh electorate. what is happening to our politics and where the run party is going and what democrats can do about it. please join me in welcoming senator harry reid. [applause] >> excuse me. sorry i was a little bit. quite bad accident a few blocks from here that held us up a little bit. i want to take just a minute and publicly acknowledge john
podesta. when john podesta came to me with his idea, i frankly was underwhenned. i couldn't believe that he -- underwhenned. i have such admiration for this man who could have been in the private sector and raised a for and that's not what he chose to do. and you're stepping into those big shoes. you've have didn't ah an outstanding job and thank you for allowing me to be here today. maybe americans are scratching their head about donald trump. i know have on more than one occasion. moe of us cannot fathom how he rows so far and so fast. his rhetoric is embarrassing, his propose sales are dangerous. republican establishment acts bewildered but should not be.
as much as they try to distance themselves from trump now, republican leaders responsible for his rise. for eight years they drained all the action from the country by replacing thoughtful engagement with resentment and hatred. we're seeing it right now with president obama's nomination of judge merrick garland to supreme court. a full month before anyway now whoa the candidate --ed so toboro bloke and treat them like a piñata. the kind of mindless whatever it has hollowed out the political debate and creates the conditions for trump to rise. republican leaders created the drought conditions. donald trump has simply struck the match. republicans began charting the path to donald trump eight years ago. at the end of 2008, president bush was on his way out of office after a failed presidency
that left the nation teetering on the brink of disaster. president obama came to office with a broad mandate, promising practicingat nick, bipartisan solutions that our nation needed. republicans were looking to the leaders, bringing them together. sadly the run leaders chose the opposite path. instead of cooperating on common sense solutions to help millions of americans, still suffering from the great recession, republican leaders chose obstruction and scorch-earth policies. at probe-'s first gnawings a couple of congressmen, senators, and strategists met at a restaurant to path the policy to opposition to the new administration. those decided on a mission. first, republican would do everything in their power to keep president obama from being re-elect. second, they would prevent president obama from achieving any of his legislative priorities. republican leaders' rejection of probe reb's manifest in one big
lie, repeated different ways, over and over again. this is the line: the economic hardships americans face could not be addressed by smart, targeted, policy solutions, if those solutions were proposed by obama. again and again, republican leaders told americans that any policy put forward by democrats was nefarious simply because it came from president obama. we have seen this big lie resurface in the last 24 hours as president obama nominated merrick garland to the supreme court. the supreme court overwhelmingly needs someone, and the senate, with a large vote, appoint him, selected him, confirmed him, to the u.s. counter of appeals to the dc circuit in 1997. at that time 32 republicans voted to the confirm him, including runs, coax, cochran,
collins, hatch, mccain and roberts. here's what senator hatch said 'of merrick garland, and i quote: i know him real well. he will be very well-supported by all sides and the president knows that, closed quote. and he said more complimentary things rums slamming garland, a good man that's once impressed. why? because president obama nominated him. that's how they treated him over his entire presidency. they've done it for seven and a half years. it didn't matter where these ideas came from. didn't even matter if they came from republicans. republican leaders repeated that big lie over and over, in many different ways. they said, whatever president obama proposes, even if it's a run idea, it cannot help you and will hurt you. look at the affordable care act. in 2009, 50 million americans
had no health insurance the centerpiece of reform by the democrats is the individual mandate. where did that come from? from the conservative heritage foundation. but as soon as president obama proposed the mandate it became socialism in their eyes. but it's not just the affordable care act. democrats propose one policy after another to address the economic hardships facing americans. many of these ideas originated with republicans, and nearly all of them had previously enjoyed bipartisan support. yet one-by-one they were reject by the republican leaders who repeated the big lie, if obama supports it, it won't help you. the list is long, very long, stimulus, tax cuts, wall street reform, infrastructure investment. issue after issue, run leaders faced a choice. help the constituents put food on the table, literally, or stick it to president obama. time after time, republicans chose to stick it to president obama.
instead of helping their own constituents. the examples continue. payroll tax cuts. mortgage refinancing, student loans, immigration reform. automobile bailout, all these policies used to enjoy bipartisan south, and all these policies would help the very people suffering from the recession. but republican leaders kept repeating the big lie. if president obama supports it, it won't help you. like any lie, maintaining this one that republicans deeper and deeper into the state. republicans soon found that propping up the lie meant they had to question any independent authority that might contradict it. so they started routinely questioning science, statistics or any other independent research that supported democratic policies. an example is climate change. the face of scientific cob sepsis, worldwide, republicans say, we don't believe the science. preventing gun violence is
another exempt in the wake of an epidemic of mass shootings, republicanned jacket common sense solutions like background checks. instead republicans claim more guns are the answer. republican leaderred have even put objective facts about the basic state of the economy in dispute. a recent poll showed that 53% of the republicans think the unemployment rate is higher now than when president obama took office. this statistic is sad, wrong, but not shocking. despite 72 consecutive months of private sector job growth, and unemployment rate below 5%, runs are still telling millions of americans that president obama has been a disaster for the economy. one after another, common sense facts and respect authorized were mowed down by republican leaders, tossed assad as one big lie. -- tossed aside as one big law. no wonder americans feel powerless.
republicans spent eight years torching the institutions americans relied on to help them face the challenges in their diely lives. instead of engaging upon policy republicans told americans there's nothing to be done. what thrived in the the wasteland the republican leaders made? hatred. the republicans to cowardly to denounce. radical groups like the tea party, with dark money from the koch brothers. the ideologies veried but one thing in common. a searing hatred of president obama whom they considered an illegitimate president. views that the tea party wave was driven forward by some of the darkest person -- forces in our cull true. but republican leaders tried to -- this resentment took three main forms. first, rendering president obama illegitimate.
second, fear mongering against muslims. third, hatred against latinos. these forces, which are all now synonymous with trump's candidate are incubated by the republican leaders for the past eight years. the most recognizable attempt to make president illegitimate is the birther movement. started when a web site asked, where is the birth certificate? before long, more and more conservative media outlets were discussing this absurd conspiracy theory. republicans in congress did nothing to quell the blatant lie. nothing. republicans in the house introduced legislation suggesting that the president wasn't born in america, and would was the most prominent american to get the birther movement a platform? yeah, trump. i find it ironic that mitt romney is now speaking out against donald j. trump and his extremism. romney knew how redick his the
birther claims were but heed consider for trump's endorsement. mitt romney helped fan the flames of resentment. over more insidious cass the attempt to render president obama ill legitimate was being waged by court part, mitch mcconnell, as reported in "new york times" six years ago, and here's what it said. before the healthcare fight, before the economic systemus practice. senator senator mcconnell had a strategy for his party, use his extensive knowledge of senate procedure to slow things down, take advantage of difficulties democrats would have in governing and deny democrats any republican support on big legislation. that's "the new york times." no president in history face the number of filibusters president obama has faced. today, some economists -- more than 500 filibusters despite the
fact many of these filibusters were against things that were a good idea. during the first six years that lbj served as minority leader, they had one or two. my six years, in the hundreds. got worse after my first six years. the only possible message some blind opposition could say is his president and his ideas are illegitimate. indeed senator mcconnell's blinds relex of any policy by president obama regardless of merits is the kinder, gentlerrism of birtherrism. donald trump's style was forged in the senate republican caucus. now before our very eyes in the debate over the supreme court. moments have justice scalia death, the republican leader decided to appease his radical
base. that night, donald trump followed mitch mcconnell and said republicans must delay, delay, delay. they didn't know who the nominee would be. merrick gar lean's name had not been mentioned. yet republicans were already resolved to undermine president obama again. the sort of punch first, ask questions later leadership is exactly what we have come to expect from donald trump. we know where he learned it. if senator mcconnell wonders from where trump came, he should take a look in the mirror. no one is working harder to support trump than mitch mccome. mcconnell sacrificing the republican majority to allow trump to pick the nominee. the republican party's antimuslim movement is another -- -- before he's elect conservative efforts try to convince that president obama was a secret muslim. conservative groups engaged in
the effort to stoke the flames of hatred. some speculate that members of the muslim brotherhood were working in the obama administration. others signature that sharia law was taking over america. once again, run leaders did nothing -- republican leaders did nothing to responsibly address the antimuslim hate from their party. now because of their inaction, they sow -- they're reaping trump's candidate, a candidate that starts with a muslim hate speech and wants to block all muslims from entering the country. the third force, republican party's antilatino, anti-immigrant underbelly is the most salient example of how runs run fear and resentment politics and a define inning official donald trump. the republican establishment allowed decades and decade of antilatino rhetoric to fester within its ranks. republican leaders looked down approvingly like extremists like
steve king used repugnant lange against lat teach knows, such as dreamers, or drug mules. republican leaders said nothing has mitt romney urged the policy of self-deportation, as jeb bush spoke to anchor babies and marco rubio called for deporting dreamers. now republican leaders say nothing has donald trump and ted russ say they want to round upped and deport minimums of mentales with a massive deportation force. together with anti-immigrant groups republicans have pushed through hateful legislation that made it's crime for latinos to walk outside with their immigration papers. republican leaders adopted these positions as part of the platform. republicans countered republican hate with policy in the senate, democrats work with a handful of republicans to draft a immigration reform bill and then
we watched as speak bane other refused to allow a vote. to this day, a lot of times i'm certain if speak boehner had given it a vote it would have passed overwhelmingly. to his credit, president obama saw republican inertia on immigration reform and countered it with a series of executive actions and i appreciate it. the republican response was both alarming and disappointingly predictable. ted cruz and others tried to force a shut gown of the department of homeland security, came within minutes of that. all the time, donald trump was watching. watching. he saw rampant extremism con doped by republican leaders who were either too cowardly or power loss to do anything bit it. so when trump calls immigrants rapists rapists and murders he is doing what he learned from generations of conservatives. the republican party has become without question the party of trump. the question before us now is this. what does trump's rise say about
the state of the public policy deplate how should america respond in for conservatives the answer is simple. the leaders must withdraw support of donald trump and do it now. now. for too long senator mcconnell and speaker boehner tried to haste both ways, giving trump occasion lay slap on the wrist, each time he says something detestable but always commit took support him. the kind of moral counter-disthat enabled the rise of trump. after years of refusing to renounce birtherrism, now supporting the most prominent birther in the nation, all leading to those to withdraw they're support. what more do they need to say. trump has made disgusting sexist statements, insulted veterans, immigrants and people with disabilities. americans are being assaulted and taunted by racial slurs --
against african-americans and trump encourages it all. there's no greater -- it's time senator mcconnell and speaker ryan to find the backbone to say enough, trump, enough. if mcconnell and ryan think that trump's racist xenophobe ya is wrong they shouldn't support him, period. refuse to revoke their support for trump they should put on "make america great" hats, via minichristie issue guess. clearly the nation can not rely on conservatives to respond responsely to donald trump. so how should progress services respond in we should double down on our ideas to rectify the damage trump is doing to policy debate, we must challenge him boldly with the strength of our ideas and we should do it now. we must continue to be the agents of change. we should remember that republicans' big lie is just that, big lieu.
and the truth is, progressive policy solutions can and well help all americans, including to the hit hardest by the economic pain and dislocation caused by the great recession. requiring employers to offer paid sick level with make businesses stronger. making college more more affordable offers ladder of opportunity to americans who now see only stagnation. raise egg minimum wage to $15 an hour will put more moyer in the pockets of workers and stimulate the economy. fixing the nation's roadded and bridges will create jobs. studies show for every billion dollar we invest in our infrastructure 47 high-paying jobs are created and other low-paying jobs spin off from that. ensuring american women are being fairly compensated in the workplace well see the equal pay for the work that men do. if they do the work that men do, they should get paid the statement. we must restore americans' faith in the democratic process. we do that by fighting for a supreme court that will overturn
citizens united and get the dark now out of the political system. and need to take a hard look at our government and doing whatever it -- where there's gridlock, we should break it. this is what democrats did with the nuclear option. and we broke a logjam of historic proportions and enabled the confirmation of 96 traditional nominees, leaving judicial emergencies across the country. they wanted to get rid of the nlrb. our guiding principle should be responding to the needs of hard working americans. if our government institutions have outgrown certain norms and tradition wes should evolve to meet the needs of the modern era, inspire a new generation of americans to get involved in public service. we can only affect the best people by showing we are committed to in the new ideas and real results with real people. most of all, we should reuss the urge to weather down foreign policy solutions.
we should resist the urge to move to the right. a few months ago i met with the new governor of louisiana. i asked him, the governor elect, a few questions. one, i asked him about how he survived down there. he said when people ask me if i supported obamacare, i just said, yes. he added if you're a progressive and you dither over thunder principles -- then -- this is a direct quote -- people won't think you're a liberal. they thick you're a liar. so let's be proud of who we are. that's what this says to me. let's not be shy about what we have accomplished. democratic policies over the last seven years created 14 million jobs, dropped the unemployment to less than five percent, and helped 20 million americans gain health care. not bad.
today there are more jobs in clean energy than jobs in the the coal mines. meanwhile, trump says he wants to make america great again. which america does he want to take us back to? the time before african-americans obtain civil rights or before women had the right to vote or before child labor laws, maybe trump wants to go back to the time before medicare, or before social security, or before the national labor relations board of before the clean air act. we have only one american america and it's already great. i don't like trump. we knee not needs to be done to make greater. i with -- we will win the power ideals will donald trump. [applause]
>> thank you so much for those remarks on a whole range of topics. i really want -- i'll ask a few questions and then have time for questions from the audience. thank you again for being here at cap action. >> a lot of time we do nothing in the senate so -- >> i wanted to ask you one particular question about the supreme court nomination process. mitch mcconnell, majority leader, said yesterday, i believe yesterday or this morning, that he just wants to let the public decide about the confirmation of the justice. what is your response to -- >> i'm reaching in my hip pocket here. here's what he said yesterday. this is a quote. this is what it's all about. the reporter said if your goal is to allow anymore hey input into the supreme court nomination why not hold hearings on garland to highlight sillent
issues here's what the said. yeah, that's not the goal. the goal is to let the american people pick the next president. who will make the decision. so that's what this is all about to them, i guess, is not the presidential election. it's a lobbyists that we have done this since 1900, we have picked six supreme court justices and n a lame duck session of a presidency. to wait for 18 months or so and leave the court locked is so unfair to the country and also to the litigants, that get to the supreme court. a lot of these people wait decades to get through and now they have to wait another few decade because they're case has to work up through throw system again because of what have done. >> we dade report that should literally tens of millions of americans would be affect bid the court being stuck for so
long, from immigration cases to women's health cases, really voting rights cases, to really not just a handful of people and litigants. it has impact on everyone. just to follow up on that, where do you see the debate going on the supreme court? we have heard that some run -- republican senators will immediate with the nominee. is that the breakthrough? but it is. how do you see this debate playing out, and just to follow up also, you said in your remarks that mcconnell was really threatening the majority, his majority, in order to take this intransgent position. why do you think he is doing what he is doing? >> i think that the republicans are doing this, led by mcconnell to satisfy these very loud, rich, right-wing people. i think that's what they want to do.
this is a big issue with them. and i think it -- i can't imagine how this is going to help the republicans who are running for the senate to have the gall for a straight face to say we refuse to meet with this person no matter who it is. we're not going hold hearings, not going to have a vote. i mean i can gist -- it's hard for me -- i don't know who came up with this, and they did it quickly. scalia was -- just died, i mean, within hours. >> what impact do you see a trump nomination, which is increasingly likely to have on the senate landscape? >> well, i hate to say this but i can't resist.
>> i've been there. >> he may be right about the mexicans building a wall. they'll build one to keep us from going into mexico. >> i hear you. >> they'd be happy to do that. >> do you see him having a particular impact in the senate races? >> i don't know how anyone -- some of these people are running for re-election. rob portman, howard blunt, i just don't know how these people can run and say, i'm supporting this guy for president. you can't run away from it. helves is the nominee. don't get much better with cruz. >> i want to ask you about that. you do -- your remarks focused
on donald trump but what are your thoughts on ted cruz? >> hearings what i've said about ted cruz. as i have been in public service, jim demint, i disagreed with him on everything politically. but i always appreciated jim demint. he told everybody how he felt. there was no surprise. he wrote a book, talking about what he wanted to be, and i have to say this about cruz. he at least has some principles itch don't like what the stand for but he stands for something. very little of which i agree with. so i have -- i'm not as turned off by cruz because he stands for something. trump stands for nothing. and that's why i was so upset for rubio.
he didn't stand for anything. >> i think you really lay out the level of obstruction, and the connection between the obstructs and the lies of trump. do you expect that people, that there are run are yous -- hear or any runs kind of re-evaluating the stance they've sustain is there a chance that if past november if democrats win the white house and take the senate, we could see some re-evaluation of this. led to odd results. >> i see people writing books about member odd the that and leadership. what can we done to correct the senate? i had a nice conversation with tom daschle this week. tom has recently lead are but has no idea what has happened since he left help has no idea. this is unbelievable. i said, and it's true, they
filibuster motions to proceed the things they wanted to get done, just to stall for time, and each filibuster takes a long time. you have to file it two days, and then you have to have a vote and then have a vote and then you have hours wasted and then on the legislation, and then have to get off -- you have two more days, a vote, 30 more hours. unbelievable time we have wasted. so, people do not understand the ends to which they've gone to stop obama from effect effect waiting progress for the country. >> if you have a trump candidacy, that is very ineffective in the fall campaign do you think we could get some -- we might have the hope that we could return to a period of even in 15 years ago, where ten years ago, nine years ago,
where we -- there were filibusters occasionally but not the unprecedented filibusters we're dealing with now. >> i look back with nostalgia to having worked with trent lott. he was extremely conservative. but pragmatic. he knew things had to happen for the country. bill frist, the only leader i know chosen by a president rather than by the caucus but a super niles guy and wanted to -- super nice guy and wanted to do the right thing for the country. i lament not having people i can work with in that regard. i don't dislike mitch mcconnell. i don't have hatred in my body for mitch mark connell. i'm just terribly, terribly aware of -- as i tried to outline in my remarks today, what he has been part of to allow people like trump to be
around, and because of what they've done, there's tremendous concern by the american people. they think the system is broken. if it continues as it is, it is broken. i have hope that the next congress can do better, but i will only come about if there's a return to collegiality, and people -- as we say in the house, gentle ladies so we can get things done. right now, republicans have chosen a path of getting nothing done, and that can't continue. or the senate is going 0 to change. >> isn't there a place for moderates in the republican party? >> well, they've -- a lot of them, and the moderate wes used to go but the moderates --
[inaudible] and he went -- tip o'neill, and tip said, where are you going to meet? that's what say about the moderates in the senate. better be a small -- because -- the reason we were able to get a few things done with all the obstruction is in the first congress of got a lot done. >> very productive. >> the first congress of obama and we had people who worked quick. susan colins, olympia snow. those were the three suspects we used most all the time because we had 57, 58, 59, for a short time. we had 60 but kennedy was sick
as we learned later. moderates -- only need three of them, but right now you have to search hard. you have susan collins and i don't know who else you would say is a moderate. >> thank you for coming itch think we have time for questions. if you would justify yourself and we'll give you the mic right there. >> if they don't want to identify themselves can we reject the question? >> i have been with you a few times but i know you'll do whatever you want. >> senator, alex bolton with the hill newspaper in 2013 you triggeredded the nuclear option and brock the logjam that was for the appellate courts but you didn't trying their nuclear option for the supreme court. there's stale filibuster for the supreme court nominee. do you regret not doing that for the supreme court as well and going forward, seeing that there's a new press depth being set for how people support nominees being forecasted? a higher bear and do you think nuclear option or change of rule shoots be considered for future -- >> if did that on purpose. i look back at my experience,
for example, clarence thomas. if you look back, he was a lot of support for him, and i decided -- tell you the whole story. i called home, see how the kids were doing, talked to my wife. 5:00 or 6:00 in the evening and i said i'm going to go vote on somebody i don't want to vote for. she said, why are you going to vote for him, then? i thought to myself, she's right. why should i vote for clarence thomas. so i called my counterpart and i said, richmond, i'm not going to vote for thomas. he says come over and we'll talk. so we both didn't vote for him. thomas got 52 votes. there was not a suggestion, a whisper in our caucus we would
vote against him. remember, if you look at the -- we have people who didn't get majority votes in the judiciary committee. we still brought him to the floor. same with bork. he didn't get votes in the committee but we brought him to the floor. so i saved the majority for the supreme court on purpose. return to those days when we do the right thing. are we a better country? i should answer my open question, if we had filibusters thomas? but at the time it was the right thing to do. >> i'm jeff cobb wiz green wire. senator reid you've said you think senator mcconnell is going to cave on the supreme court. self run senators yesterday,
including senator hatch, said they would be open to considering the nomination after the eflex the event that a democrat wins. is that what you -- most likely option for this caving? >> well, we can describe the caving -- we feel appropriate. you have your way. here's how i feel about it. the caving always started. this may not sound like a great breakthrough, but we have a significant number of run senators who said they'll meet with him, and maybe they will be brow-beaten by the leadership in the senate but i thought we mad breakthrough. it's a breakthrough they will sit down and talk to this good man but that's a breakthrough. now issue don't think we should cut any slack to anybody. i don't agree with this. i think we should do it now. its unfair to have this man
treated differently than anybody else. let have the hearing. let's him a debate and the american people can watch. in the committee 0 and on the floor. >> its possible he could be confirmed -- [inaudible] >> well, it's possible, sure. that isn't my -- i think it's such a precedent for the country that we run from a supreme court nominee. >> richard peerson on the federal employee. everybody keeps talking about -- >> where do you work? >> the federal labor relations authority. >> i wouldn't want his job. only kidding. >> everybody talks about the court seat being vacant for a year if -- >> possibly more than that.
>> -- the republican goes ahead with their threat. but the reality is that would mean that the new president would be coming in, who will have hundreds and hundreds of cabinet appointments and subcabinet appointments to make and every time a new president comes in, there's a huge backlog of these appointments. if you add a supreme court nominee on top of all that, it could easily go a year and a half or two years, or block nominations of other -- >> experience with working with federal bureaucracy is very important to this issue we have before us. nothing has happened the past eight years. we have had scores and scores of nominations held up. i mean, it's really hard to comprehend, ambassadors, they
held up -- even held up the foreign service officers, the most nonpolitical people in the world, and all we had to do under the statute is pass -- approve their pay raise. these are people that work in some of the most remote, difficult places in the world, and they held up their pay raises. so, i -- he is absolutely right. we already have so many people that should be working in the federal government that aren't. a lot of them quit and went back to their regular jobs. so you point is very well taken. >> good morning, senator reid. my name is jeff crass with ivy capital.
last week, there was a press conference with the prime minister of canada, mr. trudeau, and president obama at that point said -- was talking about negotiations, and the said at times you only get 60% of what you like, and if you get 60% of what you like, you sort of hold your nose and -- but the other party holds their nose as well but you get a negotiation out of it. i'm curious, rather than creating this adversarial type of approach, if you could somehow take a step, be magnanimous, go take that -- cross the rubicon by having an issue that, let's say, the leader mcconnell specifically wants, and negotiate with him with respect to that particular issue, such as, oh, stemming back from guantanamo bay, for
instance, giving that particular issue, let's say, to him, with respect to the agreement that the supreme court -- >> here's the problem we have. i don't mean this in a negative sense but kind of living in the past. there are ways to do things. my first 30 years near congress, that's how we did things. legislation this art of compromise. i've been fortunate to get a lot -- number of things that's now the law but i never got what i wanted. always had to change things, compromise, and that's the way the legislative process works. the problem is we have nobody who will. when i -- i didn't say it to be funny or throw-away line. they filibustered things they wanted. >> something we have worked on here a great deal,
infrastructure, we had hundred runs supporting an infrastructure bill in 2007 and then 2008 and 2009, president was elect, couldn't get the same precise bill passed again and all that had changed is that we had a different president. >> the things we have done, for example, we lost a million teachers, police officers, and fighters during the first year of the meltdown so on the senate floor, saying let's get all those people back. great for the country, the safety of this country, and here's all we'll pay for it. and anyone that makes more than a million dollars a year, will pay excess tax .2 of one percent. the rich people didn't care that would have been happy to do that. every republican voted against it. every republican and this was clearly helped their
constituents. i have been branded lately, being a guy who is mean to the runs. i ran the floor for six years, for daschle. i did the floor. he did the political stuff. i did the floor. that's why i got to know trent lott so well. i was on the floor from the day -- the moment came in until left and i took care of the republicans. democrats got something, the republicans got something. i was welshed by the run ares -- well-liked by the run are bas i protect themed but there's no one to work with anymore. they're afraid. the democrat and republican will introduce a bill, knowing it's going to go nowhere so we can issue a press release at home. >> one last question. >> senator, alice.
i wanted to see how concerned are you that democratic turnout in the presidential primary has been lower than republican turnout and you talked about doubling down on ideas but how does that translate into votes? >> it's something we can't ignore. it's something that -- but most pundits and political scientists believe that the massive turnouts have been as a result of the rivalry within the republican party, but the democrats have had this thing going with hillary and bernie for a long time and it was just kind of a lovefest. wouldn't criticize each oomph the last month or so they've had some neglect stiff stuff back and forth so not as much interest in the democrats as the republicans. so i think that donald trump has brought people out that never
voted before, and i think that there's something that should be a concern to the american people. >> thank you so much for your remarks today. thank you for being here. and thank you for taking questions. rear grateful for all you do every day on the issues that matter so much to progressives and all americans. applause [applause]
[inaudible conversations] >> friday, on c-span 2, secretary of defense ashton carter sits down with politico's chief white house correspondent michael help. we'll take you there live at 8:00 a.m. eastern. then panel only israel's influence in u.s. government hosted be the american educationol trust and institute for research. live at 59:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 2. >> booktv has 48 hours of knopp fiction books and authors every weekend. here are some programs to watch for. saturday night, at 8:15 eastern, book discussion with city university of new york professor douglas rush condition dof author of o'throwing rocks at the google bus" how americans
can build on the digital economy by change howl they grove businesses to benefit employees and employers. then at 10:00 p.m., afterwards with law professor john yu, code editor of -- liberty's nemesis. mr. yu is interviewed by the former deputy says stand attorney general. >> seems obvious that the government can't regulate the money you use to participate in a constitutional right. so, citizens united simply says, since you have a right to free speech, dirkly particularly as you said, during politics when the framers -- how can the government say, but you can't spend money on using your constitutional right. >> on sunday night at 8 eastern, form first lady laura bush chronicles the lives of afghan women since the u.s. invasion in the book "we are afghan witch."
mrs. bush wrote the introduction to the book. go to booktv.org for the complete weekend schedule. >> senate minority leader harry reid med met with merrick garland earlier today and pose waived photo op before meeting providely. afterwardses senator reid spoke to the press. here's a look. [inaudible conversations]