To families in need, new tech to boys and girls clubs, and support to veterans.
Whenever and wherever it matters most, we'll be there.
Cox supports C-SPAN as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front-row seat to democracy.
Coming up, we'll take you live to the White House as Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre briefs reporters at 2 p.m. Eastern here on C-SPAN.
And later, the White House will mark the eve of the 83rd anniversary of the attack on Pearl Harbor by hosting a performance of American history unbounds the eyes of the world from D-Day to VE Day.
President Biden will attend the performance and deliver remarks.
Playbill writes that the work tells the story of the final months of World War II in Europe using the words and images of Ernest Hemingway, Lee Miller, Robert Kappa, the 761st Tank Battalion, and a young intelligence officer who would become a novelist.
Again, we'll have live coverage of President Biden's remarks here on C-SPAN this evening at 6 p.m. Eastern.
House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jefferies took questions on President-elect Trump's policy agenda and nominations to serve in his cabinet.
This was during the Minority Leader's Weekly News Conference.
It's about 15 minutes.
Good morning, everyone.
Good morning.
In the remaining few weeks, House Democrats look forward to finishing up the National Defense Authorization Act and doing it in a strongly bipartisan way, as should always be done in connection with our national security interests and protecting the safety and security of the American people.
We, of course, need to resolve the issues connected to the year-end spending agreement, and bipartisan conversations continue to be underway in that regard to make sure we are meeting the needs of the American people.
We, of course, have to address the looming expiration of the Farm Bill, and that issue must also be dealt with in a bipartisan way and in a manner consistent with protecting farmers, protecting the agricultural industry, and protecting nutritional assistance for vulnerable Americans.
As Democrats have repeatedly made clear, as we prepare for the new Congress, we will seek to find common ground with the incoming administration whenever and wherever possible in order to solve problems for hardworking American taxpayers.
But we will push back against far-right extremism whenever necessary.
Questions?
Martin Jefferson, welcome back.
On the Doge proposal here, should Democrats be more involved in this?
Are you disappointed that Mr. Musk and Ramaswamy didn't come to meet with you?
Do you think that the opportunities here, that their political appetite is bigger than their parliamentary stomach when it comes to getting some of these things done?
Yeah, it's unclear to me what exactly the objective is related to this so-called Doge initiative.
From our perspective, we want a federal government that is effective and efficient and equitable.
And to the extent the other side of the aisle shares that objective, which is what is right for the American people, then we'll see if there's common ground that's possible.
But does it worry you about the idea that they're doing this just with these two guys who aren't part of the government, who don't have experience directly in understanding discretionary, non-discretionary spending, and therefore should Democrats be directly involved and say, look, we don't want wastewater fraud and abuse.
Democrats will, of course, have to be directly involved to the extent that there is any legislative aspect of this, and we will, by necessity, be engaged because it's clear that the incoming House Republican majority will not be able to do much without us.
Thanks, Leader Jeffries.
On the NDA and the Farm Bill, what are the odds that either of those or both gets attached to the year NCR that will need to pass to keep the government open?
Well, with respect to the National Defense Authorization Act, we're proceeding on a track where we hope to be able to bring it forward in a bipartisan way as a standalone.
It remains to be seen what the process will be in connection with the farm bill.
Thanks.
Thanks, Leader Jeffries.
This past couple weeks, we've seen Raul Grijalva drop his bid for natural resources, Gary Nadler drop his bid for judiciary, and David Scott is facing two challengers for agriculture.
What is your reflection on this increasing trend of members challenging seniority of ranking members?
I have no reflection other than that the caucus is working its will and we're doing it in a cordial fashion, having internal discussions and deliberations about how to make sure we're in the strongest possible position moving forward to deal with the excesses of the incoming Trump administration whenever and wherever that manifests itself.
You got it?
What do you make of these reports, the prospects of possible pardons for House Democratic caucus members who may have been on the January 6th Select Committee or who've just been critical of Donald Trump?
Yeah, there hasn't been a, we've had no communication with the White House as it relates to potential pardons with respect to any sitting members of Congress or former members of Congress.
It has been the perspective that many of us have shared that there are working class Americans all across the country who've been caught up in an overly aggressive criminal justice system that at times, has gone too far in terms of excessive sentencing, as it relates to nonviolent offenders who do not present any risk to some
of us.
society and are prepared to contribute to the well-being of society, to the extent that the Biden administration is considering additional pardons moving forward.
It's my suggestion that that is where the focus should be at this point in time.
Do your members have any concern that a Kash Patel might try to come after them?
Members are in a position to speak for themselves, but I don't think we're prepared to do our jobs and we will not be intimidated.
Thanks.
Thank you, Leader Jeffries.
The election behind Gunnson considering it's now already the end of the year.
How do you envision the future of Democratic Park?
Well, you know, we look forward to continuing to do the people's business in the new Congress.
And as we've repeatedly indicated, we're going to fight hard to make a difference in the lives of the American people.
To the extent that there was any mandate that has emerged from this most recent election, it is that the American people want us to work hard to lower the high cost of living and to bring down grocery prices, gas prices, the cost of childcare, and housing costs.
And that will be a focus of House Democrats as we move forward.
Kevin?
This morning, Mayor Eric Adams did not rule out the possibility of switching back to being a Republican.
I'm wondering if you have a response to that.
And then separately, now that you've had a few weeks to reflect on it, any updated thoughts on the revitalization of congestion pricing?
No additional thoughts on congestion pricing.
With respect to Mayor Adams, I'm going to support the Democratic nominee who emerges in the primary in June as it relates to the next mayor of the city of New York and work as hard as I can, partnering with the congressional delegation, to make sure that the next mayor of the city of New York is a Democrat.
Do you think that's going to be Eric Adams?
It's going to be the next Democratic nominee?
I have no idea that's in the hands of the people of the great city of New York.
Should it be?
That's a decision that has to be made by the people of the city of New York.
Thank you, Mr. Leader.
Republicans have started internal discussions about how they'll use the reconciliation process next Congress.
Reporting says that they are considering putting some border funding in one of the reconciliation bills, some of which would go to the wall.
Donald Trump in his first term said that Mexico would be paying for the wall.
What are your thoughts about Republicans having discussions about border funding that includes wall funding, given that the president previously said that the wall will be paid for by Mexico?
What we've seen repeatedly amongst my extreme MAGA Republican colleagues is that they say one thing to the American people before the election and then do something different after the election.
The House Republicans said they were going to protect Social Security and Medicare, and so did their presidential nominee.
And now we learn after the election that House Republicans are planning to try to cut Medicare and Social Security and end it as we know it.
House Republicans said before the election that they were focused on improving the quality of life of working class Americans.
But after the election, they're focused on tax cuts for the wealthy, the well-off, and the well-connected.
For years, up until this election, the incoming president-elect has said that we're going to build a wall and Mexico will pay for it.
But now after the election, House Republicans are planning to use the budget reconciliation process to force everyday Americans and hardworking taxpayers to pay for their so-called border wall.
We all support, on the Democratic side, a strong, a safe, and a secure border.
We have a broken immigration system, and we need to fix it.
We need to enhance our border security.
And we need to do it in a sensible, bipartisan way.
And Democrats are prepared to do just that.
Paul?
In terms of your personal view on seniority, is it sacrosanct that seniority trumps everything?
Or is there some level of you've reached a certain amount of years at the top of a committee and a younger, newer person is the right thing to do here?
What is the, like, how do you view that system?
How do you weigh it back and forth?
Well, the caucus will continue to work its will.
I'm not going to get out ahead of any ongoing deliberations that are taking place within the House Democratic caucus, as per the tradition for decades in terms of House Democratic leadership.
We have enormous talent spread throughout the caucus, and that talent, of course, includes both more seasoned members who bring great experience to the congressional arena, as well as newer members who've got a lot of energy and capacity and ability.
And we welcome their entry onto the playing field.
I just want to get your thoughts on President Biden's decision to pardon his son Hunter and also how you feel about the White House potentially considering blanket pardons and if those would be a smart move.
I issued a statement with respect to the pardon issue, and that statement will speak for itself.
Thank you, Leader Jeffries.
House Speaker Johnson said yesterday that the Gates ethics report is, quote, moot.
What is your response to that?
With respect to the Gates report, it's an ongoing matter of public interest, as has been expressed by many.
We'll see whether our former colleague is presented for any additional positions with the incoming Trump administration.
And to the extent that occurs, it certainly is not a moot matter.
It's a matter of interest to the American people and any senators from the Democratic or Republican side who may be asked to vote on any confirmation or weigh in on their perspective with respect to who is best positioned to serve the American people in the new administration.
Thank you, Leader Jeffries.
I have a question on SALT Typhoon, the hacking of telecommunications companies in the U.S. Has your office been affected by this hack and has this been brought up in your caucus in any discussions?
We're in the midst of ongoing discussions that are classified in nature as it relates to that matter, and so I'm not at liberty to have any discussions, but it is a matter of significant congressional interest, and it's my expectation that those ongoing classified discussions will continue to occur.
All right.
Jeff?
Everyone good?
All right.
Thank you, everyone.
I'm sorry.
Do you have any reason to believe Gates might be up for another sort of appointment that would require confirmation?
Given all the nominations that we've seen up until this point, anything is possible.
Thank you all.
Thank you.
to follow up coming up we'll go live to the white house as press secretary karine jean-pierre briefs reporters That's expected to get underway soon here on C-SPAN.
C-SPAN is your unfiltered view of government.
We're funded by these television companies and more, including Buckeye Broadband.
Buckeye Broadband supports C-SPAN as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy.
The U.S. job market rebounded in November, adding 227,000 workers to the economy after a slowdown in October caused by hurricanes and strikes.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics also reports that the unemployment rate ticked up from 4.1% to a still relatively low 4.2%.
We want to welcome back Congresswoman Gwen Moore, Democrat of Wisconsin, member of the Ways and Means Committee, and a member of the Progressive Caucus joining us from Capitol Hill this morning.
Congresswoman, let's begin with the 2017 tax cuts put in place during President Trump's first term in office.
Remind viewers of the changes that were made then and which ones are set to expire.
Well, thanks for having me, Greta.
In 2017, the Tax Cut and Job Act, I was not on the Ways and Means Committee at the time, but there were very serious changes.
The corporate tax rate went down from 35% to 21%.
I heard your programming earlier where somebody was talking about the Eisenhower years where it was 92%.
Well, the corporate tax rate went dropped precipitously from 35 to 21 percent.
In addition to that, there was a change to the standard deduction, to double the standard deduction for individuals, which was great.
But mostly the tax cuts went to the top 1% of the population, you know, CEOs of companies and to shareholders.
We had a provision called the 199 provision, which was supposed to be targeted towards small businesses, but quite frankly, the benefit primarily went, 70% or so went to very large corporations.
And so what we found is that we had like a $2 trillion tax cut, and most of the benefit went to shareholders, CEOs, and to corporations, quite frankly, and sort of didn't trickle down to regular Americans.
Which ones are set to expire?
The ones that are set to expire, unfortunately, are the individual taxes.
But even if we were, and that's about $3 trillion, but were we to renew those tax cuts, people with incomes, say, under $114,000 a year would not experience that big of a tax change again.
Those individual tax changes will benefit primarily people who are wealthier.
And we also have business, we have the 199 that I mentioned before provision for businesses that is to expire.
And that's a provision that I think the committee ought to look real hard at because we've had input from small business associations that say that, you know, that the small business community, what we consider Main Street businesses, don't really benefit from a 20% deduction on qualified business income.
It's mostly those larger companies, you know, $10 million or so more in income that organize the same way that smaller businesses do, as LLCs and so on.
they are primarily raking up all of the benefit from those from those tax cuts.
Let's listen to Missouri Republican Jason Smith.
He's the chair of the Ways and Means Committee, and he was on Fox business earlier this week, and here's what he had to say about letting these tax cuts expire.
We win this by delivering for working class Americans, small businesses, and family farmers.
If Congress does nothing, every single American will face a tax increase by the end of the year.
Every individual rate will go up.
The child tax credit, which is something that helps a lot of working families, will be slashed in half.
It will go from 2,000 to 1,000.
The standard deduction, which 91% of Americans use to file their taxes, that gets slashed in half.
These are tax cuts for real working Americans.
And I would hope to think that the Democrats would not want those taxes to increase on working class Americans, small businesses, and farmers.
You know, Jason Smith and I are good friends, and he's a very clever man.
And what he just talked about there was the fact that they elected to make permanent those tax cuts that benefit corporations.
And were they to renew them, that will add $4.6 trillion to the deficit.
And what they allowed to expire were those provisions that helped families.
You know, I just want to say that doubling the standard deduction, again, that helped a lot of families.
But at the same time, doubling the standard deduction, people lost tax deductions that they had, lost other benefits.
And again, those tax cuts for small businesses, you take a small business, there's a small business, say you had a small business that had a net income of $100,000.
That tax cut was about $2,000 as opposed to the millions of dollars that larger corporations receive.
There definitely was no equity.
So the other thing is that $4.6 trillion of tax cuts that Jason Smith has said that we need to renew would be added to the deficit.
And the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Federal Reserve Board, other economists have said not a single penny of the tax cuts that we have given to these corporations has trickled down to regular Americans, that they've gone towards CEO pay, that they've gone for stock buybacks and to shareholders.
And if there's any growth that's been realized from slashing the corporate tax cut down to 21%, it is inured to the benefit of large businesses and crumbs literally from the master's table.
So if Jason Smith says that, you know, every single person will have their taxes increased and the measly child tax credit that they have put in place to replace what we did, Democrats did during the American Rescue Plan, it's hardly worth the pain that people will endure with this being added to the deficit.
Congresswoman Republicans will have the majority in the 119th.
It will be a thin one, just a handful of seats.
Will any Democrats join them in re-upping these tax cuts?
Well, I'll tell you, some of the tax cuts have bipartisan support.
I think there's bipartisan support for the research and development credit, for example.
But the question for me is what Republicans will join Democrats in reforming some of these things.
As I mentioned before, the $199 credit is really a huge giveaway to large corporations.
The bonus, the 100% bonus depreciation, is a huge giveaway to big corporations.
How many Republicans, there are Republicans that wax on about the deficit, and I hope that they'll step up during these discussions and cause there to be some restraint.
I heard earlier in your programming that people talked about, oh, how spending is the problem.
Spending is a problem.
Providing tax cuts to corporations is spending.
Be clear that that is spending.
And the pay for these corporate tax cuts that I've heard about have included Medicaid, have included SNAP, formerly called food stamps, and we've even had Republicans admit that Social Security and Medicare is on the table.
So, yeah.
Let's get to calls, Congresswoman.
We've got a handful of people waiting for you.
Bill in New Jersey, Democratic caller, you're joining the conversation here with Congresswoman Gwen Moore.
Welcome.
Well, yes.
I just want to know about the status of veterans disability pages and health care.
I hear that the Republicans are probably going to go after that, and I've just wondered what you could say about that.
I hope I'm getting your question right.
The disability benefits, the Social Security disability benefits?
No, the veteran disability benefits and our health care.
I'm a veteran.
Okay, well, what you're talking about, I think, is the Doge committee that's to be headed up by Elon Musk and Mr. Ramaswani.
They've talked about really slashing and burning any sort of program that doesn't have a reauthorization connected to it.
The veterans' benefits that you're talking about, and I am really scouring my memory, I think that it hasn't been reauthorized since maybe 1976.
So that would theoretically put it on the chopping block.
And it's an example of how sort of this blanket notion that programs that don't have the reauthorization could be on the chopping block.
But yeah, that's an example of a program.
And I don't remember the exact date, but it hasn't been reauthorized for decades.
But it is one of the programs that could be on the chopping block because of its status with regard to reauthorization.
All right, let's go to Tom.
Charlotte, North Carolina, Republican.
Hi, Tom.
Good morning.
Good morning, Madam Congresswoman.
Good morning.
And I'm glad we strolled into Doge because that's what I'm calling about.
I was a BA nurse.
I'm a retired BA nurse and a veteran.
And the administrator in my hospital got a $500,000 bonus because he had saved $5 million from the Veterans Administration.
They say if you save the government any amount of money, you get 10% of what you save them.
So if you save them $2 trillion, then these boys, Musk and Vivic, are headed for a $200 billion bonus.
You know, I'll have to, I'll just have to plead ignorant on what you're talking about with regard to these bonuses.
But I think that the bonus ought to endure to the American people.
You know, if we've got $2 trillion that they can save from somewhere, we ought to make those investments in people.
The child tax credit we discussed earlier.
I mean, there's a $10 to $1 payback that we can document for investing in our future workforce, in our children, versus, you know, 100% bonus depreciation, which, you know, if we restore that benefit, cost us more than half a trillion dollars just to go into the pockets of big fat cats, quite frankly.
That, you know, there's more useful, productive use of money than just providing it, than slashing benefits, which is another thing they're talking about doing, slashing benefits from our efforts to meet the challenge of climate change, just to be able to provide those benefits to fossil fuel companies.
And we do know that we've got to tackle this problem and not just stand up to the donor community.
You know, there's absolutely no reason to go back to having grandma pay $500 a month for insulin because we're realizing some savings for pharmaceutical company executives who are not suffering at all.
This is the biggest profits that they've seen in the history of the industry.
And so I understand the whole notion of your question.
I'm sorry I don't know the specifics, but yeah, the trend has been to reward people at the top, CEOs, and to allow people at the bottom to suffer.
I just want to point one thing out.
You know, when we start talking about the poor, we're talking about the 11% of people in the country who are struggling from day to day, facing possible homelessness and food insecurity.
But the reality is, is that when you look at the true cost of making it in America, over half of Americans, 52% of Americans, are financially insecure.
I mean, doggone it, if that car that gets you to work every day breaks down, you don't have $500 to get it fixed up, ready cash in the bank.
52% and not a penny of the tax cuts that we're talking about reauthorizing will solve that problem.
People under $114,000 a year really will, the problem of that financial insecurity will not be solved by adding another $4.6 trillion to the debt.
Well, first of all, I want to tell the Congresswoman, Madam Moore, I love your eyeglasses.
They are absolutely bad.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I got three quick questions that I tried to cut them down, so I'm going to try to just go through them.
I want to know, first of all, Why can't a mother divorced on food stamps with a couple of kids get the assistance that she need over the years because they cut all of that, but someone who owns a company and not paying taxes can continue to get tech cuts and they haven't paid any taxes?
I would like to see the Democrats come down on those Republicans about where this money is going.
All right.
And Loretta, I apologize to you, but we have to just take the one this morning because we're running out of time with the Congresswoman.