had decided to pursue a strategy of asking the senate -- really demanding the senate, ensuring the senate not fulfill its constitutional advice and consent responsibility. if only at that moment my colleague, the majority leader, had thought this is a big deal, asking the senate not to exercise its advice and consent responsibility, is that a big deal. maybe i should wait a day and any about this, but, no, there was a rush to the floor to lay this out and that became the path that this body has been on ever since. a be month later, in march, the president did his job under the constitution. he nominated merrick garland and in so doing, it was forwarded over here to the senate and the normal thing would be for the senate to start hearings, but the republican majority leadership said, no. no hearings in the judiciary committee. why not? that is our responsibility to provide advice and consent on nomination and there's no nomination more important than a nomination to the supreme court of the united states of america. it isn't someone who just serves for a couple of years in administration o

by the senate. he was looking forward to this coming week. all of that happening as this rally does finish here, as we look at the coming week. upcoming testimony as early as monday on the russian connection question. the closed interviews that are related to the topic of the 2016 election, possible ties between trump associates and the russian government, also a new response from house intelligence committee chairman devin nunes on reports that are critical of his conduct to date. one of those responses that he gave, that three white house officials helped him view classified intelligence related to incidental surveillance of trump associates. this is what he said. >> you understand we're not going to get into sources and methods. but i can tell you that those reports are mostly wrong. >> mostly wrong? >> yesterday, adam schiff viewed that very same intelligence and the congressman said nothing he saw warranted a departure from normal reviews and procedures. meanwhile, two congressional sources tel

he was given 299 questions forse the record by democrats on the senate judiciary committee, the most in recent history of any supreme court nominee. judge gorsuch did all this with the utmost integrity, with transparency, and humility. yet here we are with the democrats engaged ince unprecedented obstruction, refusing to give neil gorsuch and up or a down vote.e the senate has only ever employed a cloture motion for supreme court nominee four times in modern history. n we voted on cloture when justice alito was nominated in 2006. we did the same in 1968, 1971,da and 1986. in 1991, clarence thomas was confirmed on a 52-48 about. and in 2006, samuel alito was confirmed on a 58-42 vote. in fact, when president obama was in the white house, republicans did not filibuster nominee. in fact, this body confirmed sonia sotomayor in 2009 by a vote of 68-31.y confirmed justice kagan by a roll call vote of 63-37 in 2010. we did not filibuster. let me remind folks. cloture is in place to stop debate, not to stop a vote. cloture was put in place to speed the senate up, to end debate and move to a

the senate floor. as the chamber appears likely headed to nuclear showdown. this comes amid developments on the investigation into russian meddling in the 2016 election. with the house intelligence committee now getting ready to hold a closed door meeting. and we get some new information about the unmasking of names. adam housely is live in los angeles with that part of the story. adam, what can you tell us? >> reporter: yeah, melissa. the story was coming out friday. we're getting much more details now. multiple sources say susan rice requested to unmask the names of trump transition officials. the unmasked names, people associated with donald trump, were sent to the nsc, james clapper, john bannon including former deputy nasa security adviser ben rhodes. these names were part of incidental electronic surveillance of candidate donald trump for up to a year before he took office. one of the names collected, they are supposed to be masked meaning they are redacted from reports unless it's an issue of na

and the senate. and, you know, fair amount of the public frankly. look at this process and say this is not how this should be going, right? they think at a minimum if you look at the senate, the senate's been able to sort of conduct this investigation and look at this. no one is saying richard burr shouldn't be in charge of an investigation of the white house on these issues. so, you know, that makes it even more sort of troubling frankly for him because nunes in comparison to burr looks like the best he's sort of bumbled this a little bit and that's going to really undermine anyone's confidence in him. in the white house i think it helps them a bit and speaker seems to have full support of him right now. i don't think he's going anywhere. >> john, i did not mean josh, i meant john. even though i did call you josh. i get called lui all the time but it's lui. kelly, on that note that john's bringing up here, when we look at the senate and i asked again representative kildee did he lose confidence in h

i yield the senator from south dakota. a senator: mr. president, last week the senate judiciary committee held hearings of judge gorsuch to the supreme court. everything we heard from this nominee confirmed what has been clear from the beginning. mr. thune: judge gorsuch is the kind of judge all of us

[applause] welcome the senator from the great state of hawaii. [applause] a loja everybody -- aloha everybody. how many of you watch all four days of the gorsuch hearing? you,e to hand this to after but we referred to as the --nt and we kind of had to the event, the election. what was going to happen to our country, what happened was the very next day, he you had the march on washington and that started with a retired attorney of molly -- maui. a day, 10,000 people have said they were going to do something. activism has not stopped since. it is because of you guys that all of us who have worked with trumpcare.e stopped was the labor secretary nominee dropped out. i have heard from more of my constituents in the time that the president has been in office than in the entire years that i have served in the house and senate. hawaii, 4000, 5000 communications on betsy devos. that is a lot. then i have this wonderful group of activists that come to my office every tuesday to make sure that i am staying the course with you guys. thank you so much. coupl

house of representatives, the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate on march 30, 2017, at 4:45 p.m. that the senate agreed to without amendment house joint resolution 43. signed, sincerely, karen lst haas. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to sclause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until approximately 5:00 p.m. today. the hearing airing live on c-span2. if you missed any of it, you can see it again tonight on the c-span networks. you can

interestingly enough, until senator chuck schumer, now the democratic leader of the senate in effect convinced everybody that filibuster is against executive branch appointments were okay, this is the way we did it. for 230 years, up or down, simple majority votes for supreme court, cabinet, everything, until chuck schumer invented it. so, it's a fairly recent thing to filibuster executive branch appointments. the democrats got frustrated after they invented this. and broke the rules of the senate, as you indicated four years ago to lower the threshold for everything except the supreme court. all we'll do, faced with this filibuster is even that up so that the supreme court confirmation process is dealt with just like it was throughout the history of the country down until bush 43 got elected. >> dana: so, senator chuck schumer actually said on the floor of the senate today that when it comes to what your part in this had been is that what the majority leader did to merrick garland by denying him even a vote and a hearing is even worse than a filibuster. how do you respond to that? b

>> well, i think breaking the rules of the senate to change the rules of the senate which is what was done in 2013 was terrible for the senate. but when we came to the majority a year and a half later we discussed this. about whether or not to restore the old -- the old system. and we decided not to do it because the custom even though it was possible to filibuster judges, the custom down to 2000 was not to do do it. the senate restrained itself and gave reef supreme court nominee an up or down vote. down to 2000. so this recent invention of this level of controversy we decided was best left alone by just leaving us where we were -- >> so you now believe harry reid make the right decision? >> no, i don't think he should have broken the rules to change the rules of the senate but that's the precedent. that's the precedent now they set on what we call the executive calendar. and the supreme court is part of the executive calendar. >> are you comfortable in ten years we might not have a filibuster anymore, because someone else may replace you and continue down the slippery slope? >> i do

senate to be the same as the house. is the house such a great role model for leading in this country? i'm not saying that the senate is, but i'm also saying that there is some utility about having people having to reach across the aisle once in a while and try and bring people around to pass major pieces of legislation on bipartisan legislation so that people have a buy in. i'm not saying that the senate's been brilliant, but i don't think you throw that into it. >>> up next, the new legal battle for president trump that was connected to his campaign rally last year. can trump be cited for violence or can he be sued? we can invest in the things that matter most: making farmland healthier. cutting down on food waste. and bringing you higher quality, fresher ingredients for less than you pay at the store. because food is better when you start from scratch. get $30 off at blueapron.com/cook various: (shouting) heigh! ho! ( ♪ ) it's off to work we go! woman: on the gulf coast, new exxonmobil projects are expected to creat

the senate i recall senator graham talked about it. ultimately there was a bipartisan group of senators that entered into an agreement that saw most of the president's nominees being confirmed and i think two of them were not confirmed so that's how we got started down this path. it was our democratic colleagues after the election when they wanted to stop the nomine nominm becoming confirmed. what was the next iteration of that? after they cooked up this idea they found it to be an impediment to their desire to pack the dc circuit court of appeals. the quarte court had primary jurisdiction over the state during the obama administration and it was a bold power grab. the purpose wasn't to fill the bench with people where they were needed in the so-called judicial emergencies because people were backed up and couldn't get a hearing in court because there were not enough judges. no, this was probably the least hard-working circuit in the country that they sought to pack the court of appeals for no other reason than to rubberstamp president

the united states senate and the supreme court. my hope is that maybe it will be a turning point, maybe we can reconstruct the sense of bipartisanship and comity that existed for so many years. many of my colleagues on the other side have expressed to me their misgiving about what was done today. but the obstruction of merrick garland's nomination, as one of my colleagues put it, filibuster of all filibusters, was another step in a continuing progression culminating in today's action, that very much betrays the spirit and values of bipartisan selection of supreme court nominees because the highest court in the land is different. i had the extraordinary honor to clerk for a justice of the united states supreme court, harry blackmun, who was appointed by a republican president, richard nixon. he grew as a justice, and surprised a lot of people. he no doubt surprised the president who appointed him. and that is what happens to really extraordinary men and women who serve on our courts as well as in the united states senate. they grow

the second piece has to do with senate and the senate rules. the senate has a long tradition of unlimited debates and requires a super majority to end the debate. 60 votes at present. there are 52 republican votes in the senate, so if you are going to do tax reform or healthcare reform or anything else, you can either do it in a bipartisan fashion and find eight democrats who are going to participate and some people believe we can this that this time around or you can use special procedures known as reconciliation to bypass the rules of the senate and have up or down vote with a simple majority, so you only need 51 votes to pass it. with the special procedures come special constraints. you're not allowed anything to do that increases long-run deficits. you can't have -- you must have a revenue-neutral tax reform in order for it to be permanent otherwise you will be force today sunset it at the end of the ten-year budget window. exactly that phenomena. >> do you have flexibility within budget rules to lose money up front on things like expensing

the chairman of the senate intelligence committee, senator burr. in new york i met with the undersecretary general with the united nations for political affairs who has responsibilities with counterterrorism. i also spoke to the council on foreign relations on the topic of islamic terrorism in southeast asia. during my visit, i was accompanied by chris maratis. my meetings, like those of bishop and senator kaine are a timely reminder of our relationship with the united states. in particular, the intelligence and security agencies. >> thank you, attorney general. >> thank you, mr. president. could the attorney general advised the senate what the outcome of these meetings was? >> attorney general. >> thank you, senator. mr. president, i can tell the honorable senators that the corporations between australia n agencies, intelligence and national security measures, both e cooperation remains unaffected by the change of administration in washington. the level of engagement between our agencies on counterterrorism, transnational crime, and the wide range

when the senate votes on cloture, the question before the senate is if the defense of the senate, a debate should be brought to a close, is it the sense of a senate debate should be brought to a close for the supreme court nominee, we have, those rules say you need 60 senators to end debate, not 59, not 51, not 57, 59 senators don't decide, 60 do. if you can't get 60 votes to end debate you don't have cloture. now after 2013 there is o one position, one appointed position that retains the 60 vote threshold and that is the united states supreme court. that is for straightforward reason, we have decided as a body that the supreme court needs to have bipartisan support. if a person cannot get 60 votes, you change the nominee, you do not change the rules. we decided this position, this institution, the court itself, the highest court in the land should be beyond our partisan disputes and differences. that is the foundation of the united states senate. it is the way this place works. without, the reality will be grim. without this rule, if you are a member of the minority party, the president's

the democrats hold the balance of power in the senate. are you worried about unintended outcomes and future consequences of forcing this type of a vote >> there's nothing in the constitution that says advice and consent requires a supermajority, so, you know, i can live with it. i can live with it when we changed it before and can live with it now. where that really gets a little bit dangerous is if they start moving the nuclear option over into the legislative side, they take bills they want to pass where they can't create the f 0 votes they have so often said the senate needs to pass anything significant and jam individual bills through one at a time using the nuclear option. they've said they don't want to go there, but every step you take toward that makes it a little bit easier. >> right. but that first step started with harry reid, right? where certain appointments were allowed to go through with a 51 votes and the intention was not to use it for the supreme court. now it will be used for the supreme court and you're saying the -- >

senate of te senate i appoint the honorable roy blunt to perform the duties of the chair. signed orrin g. hatch, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the presiding officer: under >> the u.s. senate is meeting every three days while on a two-week break to prevent recess appointments. synergy will do this again next monday and again on thursday when the return of religious at work on monday april 24 the senate lummox are expected to

next time get it through the house, you still think the senate, at this point it's dead in the senate? >> again, the best thing i saw -- again, there's been numerous times since this new administration started on inauguration day where i just felt very frustrated and hurt. and what always seems to rise me up is the public's coming out. so i think that health care bill died because i saw it in new jersey, republican congress, people had folks lining up protesting, asking for visits, town hall meetings. just when people thought they had a victory in stopping it, are going to have to get that energy back if they try to push this again. >> senator corey booker from new jersey, nice seeing you, thank you for being here. >> thanks. >> much more ahead, stay with. everything well? this clean was like pow! my teeth are glowing. they are so white. step 1 cleans. step 2 whitens. crest [hd]. 6x cleaning*, 6x whitening*á i would switch to crest [hd] over what i was using before. with tempur-pedic.t our proprietary material automatically adjusts to your weight, shape and temperature. so you sleep

house side and the senate side. on the house side, it had ground to a halt after devin nunes went to the white house grounds to view materials, that he then told the press about without telling the ranking member on the committee about. now adam schiff, the ranking member, did go to the white house on friday. he was told that he took a look at the same materials that devin nunes was showed. now, nunes problem and the key differetween the house investigation and the senate one is that the house is looking into what called unmasking. so when the government does electronic surveillance of foreign nationals, it's a routine thing. sometimes they pick up conversations that include u.s. persons or that are about u.s. persons, and sometimes those names are not supposed to be what is called unmasked, revealed, but they sometimes are. sometimes appropriately, sometimes the nunes and republicans are saying that it is inappropriate in this particular case. although there is no evidence of wrongdoing at this point. however, that

. >> the clerk will call the roll. >> the senate voted to confirm neil gorsuch by 54 - 45 vote. heidi heitkamp, joe donnelly and joe manson joined all republicans joining in the affirmative. senator ivins and did not vote. [inaudible conversation] >> hello everyone. i just got 30 seconds of stuff i want to talk to you about and then i will answer your questions on the subject. there are many things that brought us to the point of adding a new member to the supreme court but i think we witnessed some of the most important hopes that a member of the senate can cast. judge gorsuch will be an independent voice on the supreme court. he proved that to the hearing answering questions for 20 hours. he has proved he is a judges judge and most significantly, as a person who wants to interpret law and not stretch the intent of congress. finally, i am honored to have played a part to get this exceptional jurist elevated to the supreme court, a person we now call justice gorsuch. any questions? [inaudible] >> i would suggest your question creates a problem that doesn't exist. we've heard it

especially in the senate, the senate is supposed to be -- they're supposed to be the big boys of the congress. they're supposed to be able to debate these things rather than let it -- >> absolutely. >> -- be unsettled with a possible nuclear option. >> no. and, you know, it's sad really what we've seen, and it just continues. i think the people that get hurt the most are really the american people, the population in general by what's going on in washington, but it really is a reflection of so much else now that's out in ore our society and the polarization that people feel on a lot of these issues. so there's got to be a way, as you said, for them to be the big boys and girls there and work together. but we saw this going back, you know, starting i think some with president bush and really escalating in the obama add where, you know -- administration, where, you know, republicans decided we're just going to be the party of no, and it created a lot of bad blood. they're seeing it not only in the senate, but in the house now with health care, with the freedom caucus. i mean, this is so

way the senate does business. tim o'brien is an attorney. he has covered the courts of foo see you again. thank you for joining us today. one historic day. the final vote is expected to be 85-45, but since republicans have eliminated the 60 vote necessary, this confirmation is good to go, right? >> it certainly is. i don't think most americans will see any immediate difference besides the perpetuation of justice scalia's very conservative view, but that still is huge, perpetuating a view for several decades. he may be like justice scalia whose views are so passionate. >> julie: once confirmed, gorsuch will be put on the high court just yet, he would still need to be sworn in and at the white house, he would have to meet with the other eight justices. you mentioned that gorsuch does have the opportunity to be a more influential justice than antonin scalia. his approach, talk about how that might actually have more of an effect and how it might actually help him, perhaps bringing both sides together. >> a lot of peo

states senate, where the stage is now set for the united states senate to confirm judge neil gorsuch to the supreme court. republicans swept aside the main obstacle today, as partisan tensions peaked. lisa desjardins begins our coverage. >> desjardins: as a dark downpour hit outside, inside, a long-brewing manmade storm burst. >> on the nomination of neil m. gorsuch to be an associate justice of the supreme court. >> desjardins: first republicans tried, and failed, to get 60 votes needed to end a filibuster blocking gorsuch. >> the motion is not agreed to. >> desjardins: with that, republican leader mitch mcconnell launched a series of historic parliamentary acrobatics to remove that 60- vote requirement altogether. within 90 minutes, republicans voted for the so-called "nuclear option"-- to reinterpret the rules and change precedent so that a simple majority could guarantee a supreme court spot. mcconnell insisted republicans were in the right. >> it's part of a much larger story, another extreme escalation in the left's never ending drive to politicize the courts and the confirmati

these senators decide now whether it should go to the full senate. gorsuch is kbexpected to get th okay. what happens next? that's where things get happy and that's because senate look like they're going to stall and this means the republicans could pull the plug on the nuclear option. kristen welker ist the white house. we have our full panel here. let's get into it on many monday. chris, first to you. what's happening now? are we seeing senators fill in for the committee vote? walk us in to the mood. >> it's at devcon one. this would be blowing ifrg up that we know about the senate to invoke the nuclear option. let me back up a minute as we watch the conversations that are happening inside the hearing room which is expected to get started any minute now. what you have just here in the senate judiciary committee, nine democratic members, seven of them have decided they're going to vote no on neil divorgorsuch. all of them unhappy that merrick garland never got a hearing. he was president obama's nominee for the supreme court. that leaves two. who to

what the senate is up to? obviously it's his right as an american to do that, but is it... do you think that's a good idea? >> well, it is the president's right to do it. sometimes i think this is a distraction from what we should be doing, and we're trying our best in the senate intelligence committee to keep our focus like a laser on this bipartisan investigation. >> dickerson: to the question of leaks and what the house intelligence chairman has brought up, this idea of unmasking possible trump associates as part of surveillance that was done, a very serious issue. it seems to be getting a little mixed. should there be a separate enquiry into that which is separate of this question of russian influence in the election and any times to the trump campaign in order to keep the two separate. both serious issues, but not necessarily connected. they kind of keep getting muddled back and forth. >> dickerson: i do think they are connected, and i they both will be the subject of our enquiry on the senate intelligenc

the united states senate. did the white house recruited him, probably. he had lunch the previous week at the white house with his good friend doug white house, chief of staff and former new hampshire governor sherman adams. in the speech he asked about joe mccarthy to what authority does he belong. one must conclude that the senator said that his is a one-man party and his name is mccarthyism. he concluded his speech with a riff on mccarthy's persecution of curbing pariahs. he said he dons his warpaint and he goes into the dance and admit and goes forth to battle and probably returns with the scalp of a pink army dentist. he already signed copy of the remarks to eisenhower who publicly commended him. that evening march 9, edward r. murrow condemned mccarthy on this he is now a television program. he had quotations from the flanders speech and he quoted him as a one-man committee that had demoralized the president state department and leveled charges of conspiracy against the army including declaring the genera

week in the senate judiciary committee and the full senate. we learn more about the week ahead by talking to a capitol hill reporter. -- joining us is a senior staff writer for the hill. as a neil gorsuch nomination goes to the senate floor, who are the key senators we should be watching? >> two democrats came out on thursday in support, joe mensch of west virginia and north dakota, two states trump won in big margins. there are eight other democrats to watch, and an independent. the democrats are dianne feinstein, the ranking democrat on the judiciary committee. she is worried about roe v. wade being overturned. there is an argument it is better for the democrats to allow neil gorsuch to go through so they do not lose the ability to filibuster the next up import vacancy, which could make the difference with abortion-rights. the others to watch include members like claire mccaskill, jon tester and joe donnelly, who came from states that donald trump won by double digits, as well as some pragmatists, mark warner and chris coons of virginia and

looking at is the senate floor. senators have begun debating the nomination. that will end in a democratic filibusters. that's when republicans will deploy, we expect, a nuclear option. what does that do? that changes what is needed. 60 votes to get the nominee confirmed down to a simple majority of 51 votes. it's a big deal. it could change the senate we know it forever. let's get to sunlen serfaty. little bit of a busy day. >> it is and it is a big deal as you noted. we saw a few moments ago. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell take the floor and open up a very busy day and really defending that he will by the end of the day invoke the nuclear option, talking about precedent that the democrats lead in 2013 when they invoked the nuclear option on lower court nominee. certainly defending move in advance of even doing that. he also blasted the democrats for their filibuster of neil gorsuch. called it a radical move. noting that this has less to do with neil gorsuch the man. he said the opposition is more about the man who nominated him, i.e., president trump

senate forever. >> it will change the senate forever if in fact the 60 vote threshold is struck down. but the senate has operated bye-bye partisan consensus because the feeling has been over many years that these nominees should be approved by more than a razor thin majority. they serve for life in the highest court in the land. and i would regret this very destructive step if the republican leadership chooses to invokehinuclear option. >> when people say theyuestion why the democrats are going to the mat on this one, which is in fact net/net replacement for the late justice antonin scalia and not the next one, what do you say to that? >> he has evade all of our key questions on adherence to well established precedent relating to women's health care and privacy. he has left the inescapable conclusion that he would adhere to the donald trump litmus test which is overturning row v wade and striking down sensible legislation to control gun violence and he is out of the mainstream on fundamental core precedence. this seat is not a republican or a democratic seat. it should be a mainstream

after the vote, senate judiciary chair chuck -- spoke with reporters about the confirmation of judge neil gorsuch.he was also asked about the changing of the rules for supreme court nominees. this is 10 minutes. hi everyone. i just have 30 seconds of stuff i want to talk to i will be glad to answer questions if you have anything on the subject. thank you everybody for being here. there are a lot of events that brought us to this point adding a new member to the supreme court but i think that we just witnessed one of the most important votes that a member of the united states senate. judge gorsuch will be an independent voice on the supreme court. he proved that very much through the hearing. answer questions for 20 hours. i think he proved that he is a judges judge. and from my standpoint as a member of congress, one that will interpret law and not stretch congress. i am honored to have played the part to get this jurist elevated in the supreme court. a person that we now call justice gorsuch. any questions? >> this confirmation came at a pretty steep political time and what does it

if i were the president, i would find the csr and then go to leaders in the senate like senator hatch and ask them to lead a bipartisan effort to reform the health care system. neil: would you leave -- i mean, united states, california, florida, michigan, ohio, texas, utah, wisconsin, what would you do with the 1 million or so members part of this marketple? what would happen next? >> well, 70% of our members are covered under car sharing reductions or csr. we can't absorb the loss in funding. if it's withdrawn, that would basically be a breach of our contract for the government to provide health care would have to give our members noticed amid the marketplace. neil: i'm sorry, sir. united health care, some of these others want to be for different reasons that financially unsustainable for them in a different sense for you much the same. it is possible here that the financial underpinning for the affordable care act, even as it now stands is in question. >> well, i think this is really up to the republicans in the president what they want to do. if they want to stabilize the market pl

when he reaches the senate. it all comes down to the math. it takes 60 votes to confirm him and more than 30 democrats ledly chuck schumer say they plan to filibuster the nomination. >>> instead of changing the rules which is up to mitch mcconnell and the republican party why doesn't president trump democrats and republicans in the senate sit down and try to come up with a mainstream nominee. >>> they're furious that merrick gar land never got a vote but say gorsuch is well qualified. if the democrats vote to filibuster, they'll do something historic. they will change the rules of the senate to make it easier for supreme court nominees to get through, mitch mcconnell has said gorsuch is expected to be confirmed by friday. christine, dave. >> thank you for that. president trump residenurrectin promise the fight for obamacare, now he seems ready to refight the battle. saying i don't lose, i don't like to lose, they are negotiating as we speak, if we don't get what we want we will make a deal with the democrats and

a bill in the senate. is accurate?t we don't stand still. we are working. if we were in control he would ready campaign that helped our party. we would be honest about that. we want to be honest about what the democrats are doing. this is perpetuating democratic control. you don't need a bureaucracy to figure that out. think the answer is in the speech with campaign reform and is never going to happen. there was a republican and democrat party coming you are going to have a bipartisan meeting. then you will have to focus up or down, i would be prepared to work on that basis. >> the senate voted a conversion of this. , the americanorst people are not prepared to do that. debate, you have the individual mandate, you have the subsidy approach. you had to scale it back to >> even out of very expensive. is too costly. when you come back next year, do you think that there will be a subsidy in market reform? >> deeming it down or up? >> you can play games with this. think that there will be an approach to subsidi

i yield the senator from south dakota. a senator: mr. president, last week the senate judiciary committee held hearings of judge gorsuch to the supreme court. everything we heard from this nominee confirmed what has been clear from the beginning. mr. thune: judge gorsuch is the kind of judge all of us should want on the nation's highest court. judge gorsuch obviously has a distinguished resume. he graduated with honors from harvard law school and went on to receive a doctorate in legal philosophy from oxford university where he was a marshall scholar. he clerked for two supreme court justices, byron white and anthony kennedy and he worked in both private practice and at the justice department before being nominated to the tenth circuit court of appeals where he served with distinction for ten years. he's widely regarded as a brilliant and thoughtful jurist and a gifted writer whose opinions are known for their clarity. most importantly, however, judge gorsuch understands the proper role of a judge, and that role is to interpret the law,

pratt in the senate since the senate's beginning has been the president nominates and the senate decided by majority vote whether to approve by nomination. so why are we having these cloture votes? we're getting into more and more of a difficult situation with these votes. it's a bad habit. and both sides, rather, and democrats, have caused -- and both sides, republicans, and democrats, have caused the problem. there were 183 cloture votes on nominations, and i voted to invoke cloture 41 of those times. for ten of those nominees, i voted to end debate so that their nomination could have an up-or-down vote, even though i opposed their confirmation. no one has ever disputed our right in the senate, regardless of who was in charge, to use our constitutional duty of advice and consent to delay ann and examine, sometimes causing nominations tock withdrawn or even defeating nominees by a majority vote. but what i would like to suggest today is that if we continue the trend of requiring cloture votes on presidential nominees, cabinet members, and others, that may work fine, as long as we have a

i have followed the hearing in the senate judiciary committee. i carefully studied his record, and based on all of this information i can't support his confirmation. the supreme court changes peoples lives. its decisions stand for generations. it is essential that justices understand not only have these issues impact our democracy, but how they affect peoples lives, and that they consider them free of ideology. our meeting and the senate hearings where judge gorsuch opportunity to convince me that he will be an independent mind on the court. he failed to answer questions that are critical for me. his position on the rights of working mothers, whether women can choose their own health care decisions, lgbtq writes, and dark money in our elections, just to name a few. but what i found most troubling is he failed to convince me that he would be an independent voice on the court. and just the last couple of months the president has taken constitutionally questionable actions affecting muslim immigrants and freedom of speech and religion. the fbi is in

the house and the senate numbers changed slightly. the senate added one woman for a total of 21, a historic high, and the house went from 84 84 women in the last congress to 83 today. but, it's extremely important to have descriptive representation or women's representation in the house of representatives. this is the branch closest to the people, after all. and women comprise 51% of the american population. so, increasing women, increasing racial and ethnic diversity, it brings legitimacy to the people's house. although women are not monolithic and are diverse in their own expenses and views, women do bring different perspectives and different used views to the chamber. women in congress have discussed their own experiences on tanf during important welfare reform debates. they discuss recovering from childbirth, dealing with breast cancer and many other issues that are generally specific to women. and, in fact, research shows again and again that women are more likely to sponsor bills that deal with issues that disproportionate affec

ironically, of the now-minority in the senate, the democrats. and in particular senator schumer who convinced his colleagues after bush 43 got elected to start routinely filibustering judges. chris: let me ask you some specific questions. will there be a confirmation vote by friday? >> yes. we're going to confirm judge gorsuch this week. chris: secondly, do you have the eight democratic votes as we sit here today to avoid a filibuster? >> well, i don't think we know. there are democrats who have not yet announced their position. i assume, chris, during the course of the week what you asked me will become revealed by announcements of democrats who have not yet set out what they're going to do. chris: you say that he'll be confirmed one way or the other, so does that mean if you can't stop a filibuster, that you will go to the nuclear option and change the senate rules so that you can cut off debate with 51 votes and confirm him? >> look, what i'm telling you is that judge gorsuch is going to be confirmed. the way in which that occurs is in the ha

somewhere in the senate is an air duct. right before the two big recesses, the senators get this whiff of the jet fumes and they want to run out to the airport, and that's what happened. lou: to me it's great, delicious irony as they say. is there any prospect in any of this between now and 11:30 a.m. for a surprise? >> no, this is fate fate a fat. fait a compli. mitch mcconnell says they won't lower the votes to 51 for filibuster. but once they open man dora's box who knows. lou: tomorrow i think we ought to look for christmas lights and fireworks at the strum white house. seldom do you see a u.s. president meeting with one of the world leaders at mar-a-lago in west palm beach have such a successful weekend while at the same time fulfilling his promise to put a conservative on the supreme court to take the seat of antonin scalia. it's a remarkable moment. >> this might be his first major legislative achievement. they stumbled on healthcare. there is an effort to resuscitate it. lou: did you have say stumbled on it? how did

in the senate so now he will oversee the russia probe for doj, and he has told senators according to senator

by the united states senate. and so, mr. president, i want to put that in the record, may 1, 2001, "new york times" article entitled "washington talks, democrats readying for a judicial fight. ". the presiding officer: without objection. mr. grassley: thank you. after a brief time in the majority, senate democrats were back in the minority in 2003. so approximately two years after they had this strategy. it was at that time the senate democrats began an unprecedented and systemic filibusters of -- systematic filibusters of president george w. bush's circuit court nominees. then the tables turned. president obama was elected and republicans held the senate minority. at that time, even though many of us didn't like the idea of using the filibuster on judicial nominees, we also recognized that we couldn't have two sets of rules, one for republican presidents and one for democrat presidents. our party defeated two nominees for the lower courts by filibuster and denied cloture to two -- to three of president obama's n

the senate is nowhere near as partisan. most of our committees, not all, work with comity between the majority and the minority. senator corker and i go over everything before anything is done. we almost always reach consensus, not always, but almost always reach consensus. and our members work together. so it's not anywhere near as partisan in the operation of the senate as it appears by the articles that are being written. this is not a good day to talk about it. i mean, this is a very sad day. it's not sad because there will be a majority vote for a supreme court nominee. the sad part is that the rules were changed without democrats and republicans agreeing to the rules change. because we need to change our senate rules, because our senate rules, with an individual senator being able to block legislation, that's wong. to delay legislation, i get that, we're a slower body, it takes us longer to learn things than other people, obviously. but for a senator to be able to block is wrong. we haven't changed that. we should tal

the house and the senate given the political and five and that exist there. the potential for change at the potential for economic growth and putting folks back to work growing the economy again the number one priority is tremendous will look at the regular sort reform. one group came out with an announcement or study today that says in the first 100 days, we've already saved the american economy $86 billion on an annual basis in terms of the regulatory rollback we've done to date. i would love to see us get $100 billion of that savings by the 100 day, but that's about where we are. it is hard to overstate how committed we are to regulatory reform. think, the president has put on the table this idea of serious cost-benefit analysis. obviously we welcome that. there is a similar support in seriousnd japan for stock taking of the impacts of financial regulation and i think there is an opportunity for the administration to build international consensus around those issues. firsthand on the financial services committee. my democrat friends, every time of the obam

the clerk will call the role. >> shortly thereafter, the senate went on to confirm judge gorsuch with a final vote of 54 to 45. senators joe donnelly, heidi heitkamp and neil were the only democrats to vote along with every republican except johnny isaacson who was not present for the vote. craig kaplan points out the democratic senator michael bennet voted against the nomination despite introducing judge gorsuch and his confirmation hearing last month. his actions are similar to former senator scott brown, frank wattenberg and evan by who did the same for justices elena kagan, daniel l ito and john roberts. after the vote, senate judiciary chair chuck grassley spoke with reporters about the confirmation of judge neil gorsuch. he was asked about the changing of rules for supreme court nominees and what his committee will be working on next. this is 10 minutes. >> hi everyone, i just got 30 seconds so i'll be glad to answer your questions if you have anything on this subject. thanks everybody for being here. there are a lot of significant events that brought us to this point of adding

what happens in the senate? >> it would come to the senate. there would be an open amendment process. people would bring up anticipates to vote. i am committed as a physician to long-term solutions for health care of the american people. and it's not just good enough to me to repeal obamacare. there were reasons when i was practicing medicine i thought we needed to do health care reform. we have to get to a better system that was in place even before obamacare was passed. you have that commitment from all the members of the senate to provide health care that is much more affordable under obamacare, as you know, the costs have skyrocketed. the choices have gone down. in my home state of wyoming, there's only one insurance carrier selling on the exchanges. it's not a marketplace. it's a monopoly. people deserve better. >> thanks very much for joining us. john barroso. coming up, the white house set to unveil what they're calling the biggest tax cuts in american history. we have details of the president's proposals. that's coming up next. knows h

here was that moment in the senate. >> the nomination of neil m. gorsuch of colorado to be an associate justice of the supreme court of the united states is confirmed. chris: senator cornyn. there has been enough about why this happened and merrick garland. i want to talk about the impact of this going forward. doesn't this insure the next time a president get an opening, if his party controls the senate, he will appoint someone more ideologically to the extreme wing of his base because he doesn't have to worry about getting bipartisan support and reaching out to the other party. >> this is a restoration of the status quo before the george w. bush administration when there was no such thing as filibustering. clarence thomas got 52 votes when he was confirmed. but i think there is no danger of that happening. what it means is when we elect a president, we know they will be the ones who get to nominate judges, and they will have to get support for that. at least 51 votes. but judge gorsuch got 54 votes and he deserved it. chris: i want to ask you abo

security adviser and the chairman of the senate intelligence committee, senator burr. while in new york, i met with the undersecretary general of the united nations for political affairs who has responsibility for counterterrorism. .. the depth and breadth of our relationship with united states and in the case of a beating from which i recently returned, in particular its intelligence and security agencies. >> thank you, attorney general. >> thank you, mr. president. could he advised this that what the outcome of these meetings was. >> i can tell honorable senators that the level of cooperation between american and australian agencies, on intelligence and national security matters, both bilaterally and for the five eyes group of nations remain entirely unaffected by the change of administration in washington. the level of our engagement between our agencies on counterterrorism, transnational crime and the wide range of other matters of which they work together is as close today as it has ever been. during the meeting in which i participated i was able to raise key nati