and the next congress. we've seen the disastrous consequences of fiscal irresponsibility with deficit finance tax cuts for the wealthy and out of control budgets and it is worth noting and we've already heard this but i'll reiterate we're going through a pandemic right now and this spending we're doing and relief we need is real and necessary. this is the kind of process where pago rules might need to be waived. this is a good example of that. when we're in a crisis, we need to make sure the people of this country are being cared for and it's also times like these that we see a real demonstration of a necessity for greater fiscal responsibility in normal times, in times that are good. so we are setting ourselves up to go through times like this. so i would encourage the adoption of this rule change and any other changes that would help promote the adherence to fiscal responsibility as we aim to use our taxpayer resources in the most effective way possible, and with that, i will yield back. thank you for hav

congress did nothing about it. time and again i recommended improvements in social security law including extending protection to those not now covered, increase the amount of the benefits, reduce the eligibility age of women from 65 to 60 years. congress studied the matter for two years but couldn't find time to extend increased benefits but did find time to take social security benefits away from 750,000 people. they passed that over my veto. i repeatedly asked the congress to pass a health program. the nation suffers from lack of medical care. that situation can be remedied any time the congress wants to act upon it. everybody knows i recommended to the congress's civil rights program. i did so because i believe it to be my duty under the constitution. some of the members of my own party disagree with me violently on this matter but they stand up and do it openly. people can tell where they stand but the republicans all profess to be for these measures but the 80th congress didn't fail to act and they had enough

made by congress. there is a descent in this case, however, and it is a rare instance in which justices questioned the need for wartime interference with private property rates. the opinion by justice mick rain olds, joined by william day was incredulous that a ban on intoxicating the air could be imposed nearly a year after the end of the fighting. food was no abundant, and the band could no longer be justified as a war measure. as far as these were concerned, the idea that war powers could still be exercised because a peace treaty had not been signed, was a nonsensical figure leaf. the descent, however, is important indebted for showered how the conservative court of the 19 twenties and early 1930s would behave. because the court had not heard any of the property cases during the war, the libertarian had been unable to comment on the administrations expansion of governmental powers. as i now said, that expansion should never have taken place. the constitution of the united states is alone and covers

certainly in the next congress. the framers of the 20 fifth amendment knew that you cannot always count on the cabinet to act, congress has a role to play in that role must be totally bicameral and totally bipartisan and the legislation that i introduced today seeks to establish a 16 member commission that would act in the event of such an emergency and a seventeenth member chosen by 16 members themselves. eight members were chosen, passed by republican leaders in half by democratic leaders from medical personnel, physicians and other medical authorities. the other eight members are drawn from the ranks of former high-ranking executive branch offices including former presidents, vice presidents, attorney general, secretaries of defense, treasury, state and surgeon general. the commission is entirely bipartisan and the 20 fifth amendment connect only in concert with the vice president who is the key actor under the 20 fifth amendment so the constitution is designed to give us the tools we need to deal with the many c

and congress could have done that if the budget committees of the congress, and the congress as a whole, had not increased the spending that i recommended in the budget. i'm sure that you know that in the resolutions passed by the congress, that they have added about $17 billion in more spending, by the congress over the budget that i recommended. so i would prefer in that tax bill to have an additional tax cut and a further limitation on federal spending. now this tax bill that hasn't reached the white house yet, but is expected in a day or two -- it's about 1,500 pages. it has some good provisions in it. it has left out some that i have recommended, unfortunately. on the other hand, when you have a bill of that magnitude, with those many provisions, a president has to sit and decide if there's more good than bad. and from the analysis that i've made so far, it seems to me that that tax bill does justify my signature and my approval. >> governor carter, your response. >> well, mr. ford is changing considerably his previous philosophy. the present tax structure is a disgrace to this cou

as you can see, pardon me, in congress, sorry. and we're down to the single digits of people who have confidence in congress. this is people who have hardly any confidence in the federal executive. it's a strong majority by now in the 2014, these data. and that's bad enough that we've lost confidence in the executive, in the congress, and the judiciary. but as these data show, we've lost confidence in virtually all of our major institutions. these data go down to 2015. and you'll see that they're only three, as of 2015, only three major institutions in our society in which a majority of people have confidence. once you get past the police, there's not a single institution in which a majority of americans have either a great deal or quite a lot of confidence. and i dare say that today, in 2020, the police probably wouldn't figure quite as strongly as they did here. confidence in the news media, at historic lows, down into the single digit range. confidence in press and television, down clearly in the single digit range. that's bad

certainly in the next congress. the framers of the 20 for the amendment new that you could not only count on the cabinet to act and so congress has a role to play and it must be totally bicameral and bipartisan. the legislation i introduce today seeks to establish a 16 member commission that could act in the event of such an emergency. by the 16r chosen members themselves. eight members are chosen by republican and -- eight members are chosen, half by republican and half by democrats, from medical authorities. the other eight members are drawn from former high-ranking executive ranch officers, including former presidents, vice president, secretaries of defense, treasury and state, and surgeons general. the commission is entirely bipartisan and under the 20 for the amendment, it can act only in concert with the vice president, who is the key actor under the 20 for the amendment. -- the 25th amendment. the constitution is designed to give us the tools we need to deal with the many crises of human affairs that can affe

house in a new congress. mr. stewart examines how the process has changed since 1789, and the influence of partisanship on those changes. the national archives center for legislative archives hosted this event and provided the video. richard: well, it seems that the rain did not dampen any determination for you to attend today's researcher talk. so, thank you for braving the elements. i am richard mcculley, the historian at the center for legislative archives, the sponsor of this series. today's program is the third researcher talk this year. next month, we pick up the pace a bit. on may 19, a professor of law and taxation at the university of virginia law school, and a former chief of staff on the joint committee of taxation, will speak about his research and that committee's records, and the history of the joint committee. and on may 26, we host the professor of political science at wingate university, who will discuss her research for her book manuscript about the politics of national identification documents

certainly in the next congress. the framers of the 25th amendment new you could not always count on the to act, so congress has a role to play and that must be totally bicameral and bipartisan and the legislation i introduced today seeks to establish a 16-member commission that could act in the an emergency. eight members are chosen -- half by republican leaders and half by democratic leaders -- by medical personnel, physicians, other medical authorities. the other eight members are drawn from the ranks of former high-ranking executive branch officers including secretaries of defense, treasury, and the surgeon general. the commission is entirely bipartisan and it can act only in concert with the vice president who is the key after under the 25th amendment. the constitution gave us the tools to deal with the many crises of human affairs that can affect the continuity of democratic self-government. we are in the middle of a momentous election and the people will decide that, but when we get through this, the problem i

you do in congress? >> quite a bit. i do sort of a favorite book of the month that we published regularly on our website. we have a lot of inquiries about that. i also threw a party for republican appropriators every year at christmas usually dinner at the willard. but they always get a christmas present that is almost always a book. and quite often a five-minute conversation with somebody and i know that got a particular interest or what have you i will send them a book. iran but years ago, adam kinsinger is one of our brightest guys in congress part i was a young veteran and was elected the class of 2010 and his hair back then was very short. almost like a crewcut. he is still in the reserves, still flies. he reminded me of a picture of don rumsfeld at about the same age. square jaw, good-looking guy. so i bought rumsfeld's autobiography and send it over to vicente you are from illinois he's from illinois, you have a crewcut he had a crewcut you guys should get to no one another. so occasionally l just

i think insofar as it tries to effectuate congress would have wanted its support in congress working hand-in-hand. sen. feinstein: thank you, that is quite a definition, i'm really impressed. thank you. some have argued that the medicare program is , it is antional unconstitutional exercise in congressional ending power. they believe that the spending power does not exist at all. in talking about medicare and mikel security, professor -- of the university of san diego law wrote this. it is worth remembering that these programs would never have taken their pernicious forms if the constitution's original meaning had been followed in the first place. originalistswith who say that the medicare program is unconstitutional, and if so, why? judge barrett: i'm not familiar with that article so i don't know what reasoning advances for claiming that the sending power as exercised in things like the medicaid provision being unconstitutional. and feinstein: it is in law liberty, july 23, 2015. but the question is, do you agree with originalist who say that the medicare program is unconstitutiona

when a book comes out about congress youalmost automatically pick it up ? >> i do, especially if it's by an author i know well. i think he's one of the smartest reporters out there . confirmation bias which is sort of on the supreme court wars that we've seen in recent years is a brilliant look and from what i understand some of the struggles and struggles that shaped capitol hill, there's not any better that guy than carl holtz read i also just finished carl's book, it's not congress per se because he's a white house correspondent and of course now for abc news but a front row in the trump trunk show is an interesting read and i know carl, i've been interviewed by him, then on his podcast once or twice so somebody like that writes a book that i think is knowledgeable and professional, you do want to hear what they have to say because again, they're talking to a lot of people who in many cases you can't talk to or don't have the occasion to talk to and they bring a lot of insights to the political field and into congress. >> how much sharing of book ideas d

can you outline more of the considerations in congress that congress should use in establishing a fiscal plan and how this plan would facilitate appropriate time deficit reduction. >> the plan would benefit and the anchor of the plan would be a fiscal rule which is designed according to a national monetary fund to be a sustainable rule that is in place over a long period of time. radically be able to address this issue so big and problematic in a short period of time so you'd have a debt to gdp ratio. let's say that we want to or not ever going to be in a position to know more than our economy is producing. so we want to target 100 percent of that gdp. we don't want to go about that or if we do for a little bit, we want to bring it back down. so we have to send targets. i know, there are no boundaries. so it is what it is. we spend money we need and secondly, the fiscal rule within the because you are putting that in place that we could then look at targets. we need to look at revenues as well as mandatory spending and discretionary spending and tax planning. all are going to be needed t

congress has under the constitution, congress has power over foreign trade. congress is asking -- this committee is asking, what conflict of interest do you have? do you have, have you had, let's in 2012 did you sign a letter of intent to build a hotel in istanbul? did you enter into a contract in 2014 with russian oligarchs? if the answer to that -- and we have no way of getting that information anywhere else, we don't know of any other way to get that, let me set aside just for a second. as we know there's been reporting, for instance, in the "new york times." president trump is said at times, mr. cohen is a liar and the times is wrong, ok? so, your honor, congress could say the president made a policy decision about what to do vis-a-vis trade with turkey or dealings with russia or china. the oversight committee absolutely has authority to find out, should we look into legislation to override those policy decisions because they were made as result of personal financial interests of the president? and, therefore, we believe those policies should be overwritt

congress tolled for fccirm -- nomination to the . do you think congress should confer him? president on the nominating symington and congress to confirm. i think symington would be a great addition to the fcc team. he has got a lot of private and public sector experience and telecom. i've enjoyed getting to know him since his nomination was announced by the president but defer to the president and senate on that issue. >> thank you for correcting me on the name. while we are talking about the senate, we have a big hearing coming up with the ceo of several major social media companies right before the election. if you were a lawmaker in congress, what questions would you have for those social media ceos? >> the debate about social media as shifted substantially in the last six or seven months. it used to be people would say there is no bias being exercised by these companies. note market power they are applying, and i think the conversation as shifted, particularly around bias, less about a defense about them not being biased to a statement about them being allowed to be bia

former members of congress are running for their own seats. in virginia second congressional district, incumbent democrat faces republicans -- scott taylor, who she narrowly defeated in 2018. the cook collision -- political report ranks this race a tossup. welcome to the first televised debate between candidates for virginia second congressional district. >> republican scott taylor is challenging the democratic congresswoman for the state he once held. prior to being elected in 2018, she served in the navy for two decades as a surface warfare officer. she retired as a rank of commander. she graduated from the u.s. naval academy and received a masters from old dominion university. >> and republican candidate scott held this seat after winning the congressional election in prior to serving in 2016. congress, he represented virginia beach in the house of delegates. taylor served overseas as a navy seal sniper. he received a bachelor's and a masters degree in international relations from harvard. >> here to moderate the debate is national politica

how much money does congress need to allocate towards these projects? >> guest: look at where we are with the fixed side. with allocated roughly $20 billion from 16 billion for the first phase, potential 3 billion for another face. this first auction will give us a lot of information. we set up with $16 billion, providers can bid down from there if they can provide connectivity for less than that. the information we get from this what we call phase one auction will be a significant indicator of the remaining amount of funding we would need. >> i just wanted to switch gears for a bit because we getting so close to the election, and a big issue in this election is social media companies and how they are operating -- monitoring content. republicans have traditionally -- light touch approach but now we see president trump calling for section 230 be outright revoked in passing executive orders targeting that law. do you think this is a seachange in how conservatives think about regulating the tech industry? >> guest: i do think that the bait of a big tech is

congress has discussed this. if congress is going to do it they have to decide for congress. we've seen that again in some environmental areas as well. without major question comes into play. i think that could come into play here and create a problem. again, how long this is going to last? litigation takes a long time. and so, to some degree they have the vaccine out by the end of the year. and lawyers do it all the time, i've seen it when i was a clerk of the second circuit in private practice or law from its take a strategy is probably a winning strategy for this value and delay. the whole premise here is delay. it's why the formal rulemaking is not were all the power is. so in a focus on things like enforcement as well. the question here isn't necessarily will the cdc ultimately win the lawsuit? will a large real estate actor went to cross executive branch of the executive government? they may not even if they're in the right. sue and that's very interesting let's play that out a little bi bit. i don't think this is a good idea for the cdc or any agency to be essentially

taylor: did congress mandate it though? rep. luria: congress shouldn't mandate anything specifically. i will talk about what i have done. nuclear is a important part of the future of our greener and cleaner energy. i introduced the nuclear energy leadership act. it has been included in the senate version of the ndaa and the house energy package. it invests in the future of nuclear energy. new fuels for nuclear energy and small modular reactors. we cannot get to greener and cleaner and carbon free emissions, free energy, without including nuclear. i have been a leader on that in the house and working for my senate colleagues and we will continue to push it forward. joe: mr. taylor, same question. what is one simple change you would like to see congress mandate to help the air and water in virginia and throughout the country? mr. taylor: let me first say i'm a conservative so i am a conservationist by nature. i grew up on the eastern shore working on a crab house. i live on the chesapeake bay. i want my son to benefit from this be

congress has changed it from time to time up through the 1860s. since then it's been at nine members. congresst could change the numr of supreme court justices again if iter wishes to, and that woud require, just like any other law, a majority in each house and a president's signature. so that's how, the size of the court. the congress also has the power to set the jurisdiction of the supreme court, and what that is exactly is not -- the outer limits have not been fully defined. we haven't seen the congress take away issues and say the supreme court is not allowed to hear one kind of case or another kind of case, and the supreme court might have to decide whether congress can take away some of its powers. can congress decide how many justices are required to put a case on the docket? right now under supreme court rules, as mark points out, you need four justices to put a case on the docket. of course, you need five to have a majority opinion or at least a majority of those who are participating in the case have to vote for one side or the other. c

congress has studied the issue a lot. not having any procedures or standards in place that would add to the line of the statute that says when the vice president is incapacitated, defined that. the previous one before 1947 just had the cabinet, no speaker, no president it was just the cabinet and that worked okay. if they kept it this way we wouldn't have the problem and one of the reasons they did that was because of the constitutional issue. >> you are on with the professor. >> caller: good morning. i spoke to the person that asked me what i want to discuss. i want to discuss the constitution itself and impeachment of a president. what i want to do is discuss the constitution of the united states, congress and the senate in reference to impeachment of a president. the constitution of the united states, and i'm going to discuss that. >> what are your specific questions about it? >> i want to discuss when a president is impeached and what the senate does in reference. what i want to discuss is article one all powers grant

is the fact that congress has delegated that it is very difficult for congress itself to rein in. they had tried to rein in. as well as the structural damage. it's very difficult for the courts to rein in. the way that it gives them too much coercive power not too much coercive power to make it work better in a modern economy. in a humanitarian fashion. >> think you so much. thank you for eliminating the civil and extremely educational discussion. your homework which i hope you will be. the president and immigration law as well as the president who would not be king. and also continuing to educate yourself about the constitution and the best way to do that is to go to the national constitution center. to pick a clause of the constitution that you didn't know about. and dig in and read the best arguments about the things that they agree and disagree about. and the national constitution of the senators. they are going on zoom and offering free classes. and if you had kids learning remotely at home. if they want to learn and grow as citizens. we hope that you will join us live on zoo

these were all published by congress. the prime mover behind the original edition was lindy boggs of louisiana, who was a great proponent of house history ended a lot to promote the history of the institution. those books were like pamphlets at the time because so few women and african-americans had actually served in congress. a second edition was published of both those books in the early 1990's. and a volume on hispanic americans was added. at that point, we didn't have a history operation in the house, so the library of congress produced the first edition, which appeared in 1995. so, the second edition of hispanic americans, and we are working with richard on asian and pacific islander americans, which is a few years down the road, but that will wrap up the series. it mirrors the structure of the books on women and black americans in congress. there are individual essays about every member introduced in chronological order, with contextual essays that set them in generational groups. these are fortified by appendices

it is the united states congress. and by 2-1, congress is blamed for these deficits and the answer is to discipline both the executive branch and the congressional branch by holding the line on taxes so i'm pledged to do that, and those pessimists who say it can't be done, i'm sorry, i just have a fundamental disagreement with them. >> governor dukakis, your one-minute response. >> the vice president made that pledge, he's broken it three times in the past year already. so it isn't worth the paper it's printed on. if we continue with the policies mr. bush is talking about this evening, a flexible freeze. some describe it as an economic slurpee. he wants to spend billions on virtually every plan around. he says he's not going to raise taxes though he has broken that pledge repeatedly. he says he wants to give the wealthiest 1% of the people in this country a five year $40 billion tax break and we're going to pay for it and he has been proposing all kinds of programs for new spending costing billions. if we continue wit

what that number is, the congress these two have. a careercome politicians and forget what it wife, a-- i am a mother, i will never let it be lost on me. >> would you personally take any term limit pledge? rep. hinson: i don't know what the limit needs to be but i don't plan to do this forever. rep. finkenauer: i don't think there should be anything under the constitution to do x, but i think it is a discussion we should be having, especially as we see the different experience of congress, it is important to have new voices and to be able to have new ideas in both the democratic and republican parties, but i think experience is also important and being able to get things done and knowing how the process works but the way i look at it, i'm going to serve for as long as is necessary for me to serve where i feel as though as i am adding something. if you are not adding something, you should get outs. >> we have two minutes left. boothsrs go into voting or sit down to mark absentee ballots, what you want them to remember about you? rep.

a member of congress help address that? rep. allred: well, we do need to have reform and we do need to have reforms that try to provide more resources to the police where needed and also take some of the responsibilities that should not be in their hands off their plates so they don't have to do with those things. in the congress, we passed legislation to try to take steps to restore the relationship between the police and the communities of color. it begins with accountability because we must have accountability. we also have additional money for training, body cameras, the storage of body camera footage, banning things like choke colds and no-knock warrants. these are some things dallas is already done on around and we want to make national. let's also talk about who is working to defund the police. voted for $600 million for additional funding in the first heroes act, that is additional funding. mitch mcconnell and the republicans in the senate said no, we are not going to take that up. they demanded we come back with a much

the congress also sets jurisdiction of the supreme court. but that is exactly has not been fully defined -- but that has not exactly been fully defined. the court is not a love to hear one kind of kiss or another kind of case. the supreme court might have to , can they decide how many justices are required to put a kiss on the docket? right now under supreme court justices toeed four put a kiss on the docket. on the docket. could congress say, you cannot hear a case until each justice agrees? my immediate answer is, i don't know. i've never heard of congress trying to intervene inside the internal rules of the supreme court to that degree. by that matter, could the congress say the court must have unanimous opinions in order for the decisions to take affect? -- effect? there would be what we call separation of powers. in other words, can the congress encroach on the internal workings of the supreme court to the degree? or would the objection of the court itself? seen those issues arise. that kind of proposal, getting into the internal machin

one of my that this is a different type of political scientist in my view with the studies of congress from the district level up for the states and senators and to read a couple of his books happen to read enough of them and i have read a couple books that was his last book published 2013 and in the earlier book that is just a granular of congress i know what he writes about and it is just fascinating a reminder how often what somebody does in washington it is a reflection of who they represent, their interest and their understanding of the worl world. we have to lose that dimension and a lot of reading this summe summer. >> congressman there seems to be a theme and that is world war ii. no deliberate design like everybody else i'm always fascinated there have been other books also the callaway book of the indian world of george washington is fascinating me as well. that seminal conflict of the 20h century and and then to understand what they came out of it and to become the after that on we are and how we think the grounding to be effective and the current time. >> is there a course

he said i'm not a member of congress. the democratic congress is not under my control. so he said if you're going to blame me for that, you can blame me -- i'll blame you for watergate also. we have who just stead out the presidential press secretary. he's talking now so we'll listen in. what's going on out there? >> i don't know any more than you, doug. they were down to the last few minutes and the sound suddenly cut out. i don't know what the explanation is. >> what happens now? will the debates continue? >> i don't know. we were listening upstairs on the monitor and ed newman wasn't quite saumur what was going to happen either. >> unless those putting on the debates decide what to do. >> you're sitting there with members of the administration, coleman, ambassador, mr. harmon, the speechwriter. what's your impression? how do you think your guy is doing so far? >> we think -- we had a little time to talk after the sound went off. we sort of polled each other. everybody came to the same conclusion and that is it was a clear-cut victory for the president. >> i don't thi

in congress, i will fight tirelessly for this community. for healthcare, education for economic opportunities. i'm so grateful for the opportunity and for anybody is interested in learning more about becoming can read about me and thank you so much. i hope to earn your vote. kyle: thank you. that is all the time that we have tonight . we appreciate candidates giving their time this evening to help you at home make an informed decision when you about . want to say thank you to jill and eddie for the wonderful and very thoughtful questions. we also want to take the remind you that early voting began yesterday. if you're voting by mail and have not requested about you need to do that soon. we hope that you will stay with us tonight for another debate. that would between vice president candidates kamala harris and mike pence. that is coming up tonight at 9:00 o'clock. when will have a wrap up tonight live at 11:00 o'clock i'll be there alongside m.thank you forp bringing his debate to you and thank you for watching. we will see you at ten tonig

the president can't order congress around. congress can't order the president around. that's not bad for a guy that's never been there, right? but you have to work together. now, i have talked to the chairmen of the committees that want this. they're democrats. the president wants it, but we can't get it because we sit here in gridlock because it's a campaign year. we didn't fund a lot of other things this year, like the savings and loan mess. that's another story that we're going to pay a big price for right after the election. the facts are though -- the facts are -- the american people are hurting. these people are hurting in the inner cities. we're shipping the quote, "low paying jobs" overseas. what are low paying jobs? textiles, shoes, things like that that we say are yesterday's industries. they're tomorrow's industries in the inner cities. let me say in my case, if i'm out of work, i'll cut grass tomorrow to take care of my family, i'll be happy to make shoes, i'll be happy to make clothing, i'll make sausage. you just give me a job. put those jobs in the inner

offered $1.8 million, congress going higher than that. would house republicans report $1.8 trillion bigger deal? >> the president's 1.8, a large big deal. nancy pelosi still makes us go home instead of getting something done. the american people would want anything to go forward. republicans time and again pushed forward ideas. the speaker controls the house. the answer to your question it doesn't matter what our answer would be because the speaker has denied anything. >> vote for $1.8 trillion? >> i would always read a bill but what is interesting to me as their own members, the democrats have asked her to take this deal. she's the only hurdle, the only roadblock to being able to vote on it. we have a discharge petition that would remove ppp money, $137 billion. she forced her members not to sign. there is one stumbling block to any deal getting through, doesn't matter the size. the speaker of the house is the only one. >> do you believe there will be a covid-19 relief deal? will there be a covid-19 relief deal before the election? >> as

it's an honor to serve the community and congress. i'm committed to the community so much so i live across the street from the house i grew up in. i raised my son as a single parent and cared for my parents and their final years. wonderful people who suffered from grave illnesses, and i ran the family newspaper business all at the same time. my son today is a graduate of the u.s. naval academy and serving as a captain in the u.s. marine corps. this campaign is about two different candidates especially to those served in congress. my campaign i went to congress to work with president trump to bring historic resources to the community and grow the economy. my opponent sided with the far left and voted with nancy pelosi 90% of the time and while he was dragging the country through a failed impeachment proceeding, dangerous virus was coming to the shores. we have a choice between someone who is going to preserve america's greatest surrender to socialism. i would be grateful for your vote november the third. thank you so much. >> i also wa

congress can do this. and it's not an irresponsible action with the walls all falling down around american prestige and power in the world if we decide we're going to get out. congress would simply be saying, okay, we fought for seven years. we've bled and died and spent our resources on this, and now the time has come to say to the south vietnamese, take it over. we'll give you time. over a period of time, we're going to be withdrawing and you can go on getting aid if you fight for yourself in your own civil war. we're not going to stay there and fight in bleed and die for you any longer. >> but the point is simply this, it's not longer the opinion of presidents and no longer the opinion of senators. it's the evidence of history, of over 40,000 deaths and this amount of resource expended has proven each one of the escalations to be wrong. how many more american men have to be heaped upon that pile of war. after all, the united states is not going to impose any permanent solution in asia to settle asian pr

claudia: they need to stop shouting at congress. it has been pretty obvious for a while now that congress is not going to act. so i would like to see the federal serve, even out in public, pushing for new ideas, new ways to help support the ,conomy, asking for authority using authority it has, even if it is in a regulatory space. they've got to figure out how the federal reserve can do more. they cannot rely on congress to do this, and they know it. and frankly, i'm happy that jay powell has been so direct. it is unusual for federal serve chair, but it's not working. you can't just keep doing it and hoping for the best. joe: i'm really interested in what you're saying about new tools. they're not going to be able to get congress to give them new powers. rates are near zero and probably going to be for several years. so there isn't much more that can be done on the right side. that leaves some sort of credit easing. what are the tools that you think the fed clearly has within its legal toolbox that it can do to get more money into th