As we close out the year, we're asking you to stand with us.
Your gift, no matter the size, goes 100 % toward supporting C -SPAN's vital work, helping ensure that long -form, in -depth, and independent coverage continues to thrive in an era when it's needed more than ever.
Visit c -span .org slash donate or scan the code on your screen to make your tax -deductible contribution today.
Together, we can ensure that C -SPAN remains a trusted resource for you and future generations.
The House will be in order.
This year, C -SPAN celebrates 45 years of covering Congress like no other.
Since 1979, we've been your primary source for Capitol Hill, providing balanced, unfiltered coverage of government, taking you to where the policies debated and decided, all with the support of America's cable companies.
C -SPAN, 45 years and counting.
Powered by cable.
Yeah, so the government's not going to shut down.
They're going to come to some agreement, but right now, this is, it's just kind of negotiations are still ongoing.
The plan was originally for Johnson and leadership to release the text of the continued resolution yesterday.
It was supposed to be sometime in the early afternoon, early evening, around there.
And then they didn't release it.
And the reason why is because there's still some fighting going on.
So Republicans really want aid to farmers, end of the bill.
And obviously if you want to ask, but they need Democrats to support it.
So they're like, Democrats look at it as like, oh, if Republicans want this, then we need to get something out of it.
So currently there's a lot of back and forth over what they're going to add.
Democrats have a lot of demands that they can meet.
For example, one of it is like 100 % funding for the bridge in Baltimore that currently collapsed, as well as some other things.
So there's some back and forth there trying to get negotiations.
Additionally, there are some Republicans that are really upset about this kind of thing.
What is funding for farmers?
How did that come up in Canada this year?
Well, if you're going to give Republicans this, then...
You still need our support, so we're going to need something in return.
And so it's really just kind of stalling the whole negotiations.
And then remind people, if they do pass this, how long of a continuing resolution this is.
It's more than likely, the rumor here, is until the beginning of March.
So Johnson really wants to kind of get something into March, which, as I've reported before, as well, is that there's a lot of Republicans that are upset about that.
I mean, this could be well into Trump's first 100 days, so they're going to have to be dealing with reconciliation.
With Senate confirmation, so they're gonna be having to deal with a lot, and then you're gonna throw government funding on their plate.
Additionally, there's likely gonna be a 217 -215 majority.
It's likely going to be a very slim majority, because you're gonna have Matt Gaetz, who's already resigned, his seat's not gonna be filled by then.
Mike Waltz is going to be resigning on January 20th, he's gonna be National Security Advisor.
You're gonna have Elise Stefanik, who likely will be confirmed by then, so she won't be a member of the House anymore.
So that's going to be a no margin, because a tie in the House fails.
And so you're going to have no margin for error, and it's already tough enough, as we're seeing today, to pass any kind of legislation, especially spending bills.
But they will have a Republican Senate, which makes things easier on that side.
It does make it easier on that side, yes.
But again, they're going to need 60 votes to get anything passed for government funding, and they're only going to have 53 votes.
So they're going to have to kind of do some bipartisanship there to get to that 60 -vote threshold in the Senate.
And as we don't have bipartisanship in the House...
So what's the alternative?
A 12 -month, 9 -month government funding bill, CR?
If he would...
There's a lot of members that I talked to that said they would have preferred just to quote -unquote clear the decks, which would have meant get funding off the plate, actually do the spending bills, actually do the appropriations like they're supposed to, not just do a continued resolution.
Obviously, with only, what is it, four days now, that's not a possibility.
And so people realize that this is now Johnson's only option.
I talked to Steve Womack in my story.
He was just upset.
He said there's a lack of leadership.
They don't have leadership right now because what's happening...
So RFK Jr. is going to be up.
Up on the Hill for the first time well, not first time as nominee.
He's gonna be meeting with senators and so he's really gonna be making this pitch, as we've seen it's been.
He did not have a good end of the week last week and, you see, Mitch Mcconnell um kind of came out, not not against Rfk Jim by any means, but basically saying hey, like we should kind of back off this kind of skepticism.
The polio vaccine, Mitch Mcconnell, famously a polio survivor himself, John Corden, tweeted out an article that was looked at as a subtle jab at RFK about the polio vaccine.
So there is some people that are, RFK's going to have some tough questions, especially about kind of his stances that he's taken in the past on these vaccines.
Obviously, especially when you look at McConnell, who is a polio survivor, he knows the effectiveness of these vaccines, and he doesn't want to see these go away.
You talk about the headlines late last week.
The headlines continue this morning.
This is the front page of the New York Times.
Kennedy aid filed to revoke.
Yeah, I do not know exactly if they're going to be meeting necessarily this week, but I do know that he is going to be meeting with him sometime before the confirmation hearing and he's going to want to get answers to these questions.
I mean, that headline was exactly what McConnell was referring to.
I mean, that is something that he does not want to be reading on the front page of any newspaper.
And so I do imagine that he will be meeting with them 100 % before the confirmation hearing.
Anyone else on the Hill this week that you're watching for?
I think I'm going to be, I mean, obviously Pete Hegseth, as I reported, I mean, he kind of salvaged his nomination.
It was looking grim for a second there.
I mean, there's reports, I mean, I also reported that Ron DeSantis was being considered as a replacement.
He was really struggling.
I mean, he was going through, he was getting these tough questions, stories coming out about his past, and he salvaged this.
He kept fighting.
He pushed forward with the help of people like Donald Trump Jr., J .D. Vance, Breitbart, Charlie Kirk.
They all kind of did this pressure campaign because they saw how Senate Republicans were emboldened after Matt Gaetz may effectively be killing the Matt Gaetz nomination, saying that you're not going to be Attorney General, we don't want you to be Attorney General.
They knew that if, heck's sake, the same thing happened, Senate Republicans would be emboldened and be like, we're more powerful than Trump.
We can...
We're good to go.
He's caving to the Senate as well.
Convince Senate Republicans to vote for him, Joni Arch especially, Lindsey Graham especially.
And while he's not out of the woods yet completely, he's significantly in a better place than he was just two weeks ago.
Reese Gorman with us this morning to talk about the week ahead in Washington.
Always interested in taking your phone calls as well.
Phone line split as usual.
Republicans 202 -748 -8001.
Democrats 202 -748 -8000.
Independents 202 -748 -8002.
If you want to read his stories, it is notice .org.
For viewers who are not familiar, what is notice?
So notice stands for News of the United States.
A little play on POTUS, CODUS.
It's founded by Robert Albritton.
It's about a year old.
We have the notice side, which is basically this news side, which reporters such as myself and others who cover Capitol Hill, cover national politics, cover the White House, cover energy and environment, the DOJ.
And then there's also a fellowship side of it, which is we have 20 fellows now.
There's 10 fellows in the first class, 10 fellows in the second.
Where these are people who are not necessarily all new to journalism.
Some people might have done local journalism.
Some might be fresh out of college.
We have one person who's a veteran who kind of got out of the military, wanted to get into journalism.
And so we're trying to help them kind of get into national news in the best way.
It's kind of like a teaching hospital.
It's kind of just by doing, not sitting in a classroom at J school.
And so really we're teaching them.
They get to come up on the hill.
They get to cover stuff.
They get to go out on the campaign trail when the campaign was going on.
They get to go into local municipalities and cover states and cover cities.
And it's just a really cool kind of...
Why include that as part of the notice mission?
Why a teaching hospital for journalists?
Journalism school is great, but I mean, but a lot of times in order to do journalism in D .C., it's kind of hard to get a job up here for a while, especially because, I mean, journalism doesn't pay very well.
It's highly competitive to get a job at one of the outlets up here covering national news.
And then, well, as we know, local news, where, I mean, I spent three years in local news.
I love it.
It is, I mean, it's kind of harder and harder to find good local news outlets because they're getting, whether it's getting bought up by hedge funds, and also if you do find one, they don't pay very well.
We just did an hour -long segment on I think,
I mean, it's 100 % that the trust in news is down, right?
I think that there is, I mean, people are watching the news less, and I think we saw as well, I mean...
They're getting their news through other mediums, whether it be podcasts, whether it be kind of different news segments.
So I think it's something that definitely we have to look internally and be like, why are people not trusting us?
What are we doing?
And I think it's, I mean, it's just an objective fact that people don't trust us anymore.
I mean, we've lost the trust of a lot of the American people.
So I think it's just more of an introspective thing we have to look at and be like, why are people trusting us?
What are we doing?
What have we done for the past 10 years that has led to this point?
We're good to go.
I think?
Talking about that out in the open.
I think just being as fair as possible.
I think listening to people and giving both sides and not necessarily implementing your opinion or what you think is best for a CR with this.
I think talking to people, I think the way it kind of goes with building relationships with sources as well.
Whenever you're working on a story, people don't want to just feel like you are talking to them and you don't actually care what they say.
You think they're stupid.
They actually want to feel heard.
They want to feel listened to.
So I think actually talking to these people that are involved in these things and then reporting the news kind of as fact there.
I mean, obviously, there's objective truths that you implement in, but I think that, I mean, you don't just go talking to a member of Congress who might be opposed to this CR and be like, oh, why are you opposed?
You want to shut down?
That's kind of dumb.
No, you'd be like, oh, well, like, why are you opposed?
Actually, listen, hear them out.
Be like, okay, well, like, we'll put their point in because there's people out there in America that will see their point and be like, I agree with what they're saying.
So the CR is happening this week.
What else is happening on Capitol Hill that could impact Americans at the end of a lame duck Congress when we're all focused on the regular end of the year funding fight, the scramble, the potential for a government shutdown?
What else is happening that people may not be paying as much attention to that down the road we're going to find out, oh, that's the thing that actually had a lot of impact on people?
I mean, the Senate's going to be passing the NDAA this week, hopefully, so that's their...
And explain what the NDAA is.
NDAA is the National Defense Authorization Act.
It's basically the annual defense act that kind of gets in and kind of gives...
Just anything the military can do, that's what the NDAA is, and it really is there to kind of...
It funds things, it kind of gives the military more power, different powers here and there, and it has to be authorized every single year.
So the House passed it, and obviously...
For the most part, it usually is pretty easily bypassable.
In recent history, it's been more and more difficult.
There's always kind of these sects that oppose it, but it always passes pretty overwhelmingly.
It's just a fight to kind of get in and out things.
I know that Mike Rogers of the House Armed Services had said that there are things in it that he wished weren't in it at this point in time, but end of the day, kind of John's had to put it in and get Republican support.
What's one of those things?
One of those things I believe was kind of that...
They put in one of the cultural items of no funding for transgender surgeries for military members.
And I think that that was something that some members of the House Armed Services Committee looked at.
This does not need to be in the NDA.
We don't need to make the NDA this kind of culture hot button issue.
We could have Trump address that on January 20th when he's sworn it off.
So there are some people that are kind of upset at that because they're like, the NDA is historically, I mean, they just kind of want to do the job, but they kind of turn to this kind of cultural hot button issue.
Question from Twitter.
JD writing in.
Mr. Gorman, in your opinion, what are the top three legislative priorities for Congress in the first week of the new Congress with Trump's transition in mind?
I definitely think reconciliation is going to be a big one.
They're working on what it's going to look like.
Reconciliation is basically where you can pass something through the Senate at a filibuster proof, so it only needs a simple majority to pass.
And it's basically how...
Parties in power kind of get their big issues through.
Biden did it multiple times when he had both the House and the Senate.
And now Trump's going to do it.
So what's the talk right now is what reconciliation could look like.
But that's definitely going to be one of the top legislative priorities.
I mean, there's talking in one bill and two bills.
So if there's two bills, the first bill would be border energy.
Kind of these like big issues that not necessarily tax related that Trump has talked about.
And so they'll try to get that through, which would be just a simple majority in the House, a majority in the Senate that would pass.
And then second priority would likely be taxes, would be kind of reauthorization of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act from 2017, which more commonly knows the Trump tax cuts.
That there's the salt, raising the salt caps, which is something Trump has promised to do that includes stuff like no tax on tips that he's emphasized.
And so those things right there are stuff that he will also be focusing on.
And then also, I mean, just border security net large.
I mean, there's Why is reconciliation a get -out -of -the -60 -vote -majority -free card?
For the party in power?
It's a parliamentary thing.
So, I mean, it's basically just a way, it's called budget reconciliation, where it's not everything to be used for.
So you can't just have your broad priorities.
You can't just be like, oh, I want to do X.
The parliamentarian has to agree that this falls under this reconciliation measure.
So it's a way of just more easily getting stuff through.
And there's stuff that, I mean, the parliamentarian at times rejected part of Biden's reconciliation plan.
And kind of narrowed the scope of it.
And so it is a very narrow scope that the parliamentarian has to be like, this does not fall in line with this reconciliation.
And we think an immigration bill would be something that would be allowed to use...
It would be something that would be...
Who's the parliamentarian?
Good morning.
How are you doing?
My comment is something that I continue to use with everybody.
It's very simple and what we can understand as we move forward in elections, and that is using a football analogy for our positions.
One of the things that we did at this election was that we dropped the ball.
We had a good quarterback, Joe Biden.
He dropped the ball at the debate, but instead of us coming and huddling up whenever the referee throw the yellow flag, we walked off the field.
So we can't do that in the future.
We have to come together and huddle up and discuss what is our next play instead of, because we just went willy -nilly.
My belief is that if I were the campaign manager, I would have had Joe Biden and in the future any candidate on every news outlet.
The very next day, reiterating the questions from the moderator of that debate.
And that way, that's where we drop the ball.
But I do have to say that there's one positive that the Democrats know how to pivot.
And we pivoted really quickly.
But I think the football analogy covers any election dog catcher to the president.
So you have a good day and Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.
Reese Gorman, any thoughts on that?
Yeah, I think that she kind of just expressed her opinion there on kind of where she views that the Democrats, and I think it sounds like she thought the Democrats did well in the election.
They did kind of come in on the margins on the House.
They did end up at a net positive, even though they did kind of still lose the House, but there was a net positive.
They did gain some seats, but they lost the White House and they lost the Senate, but it sounds like she thinks that the party's going in the right direction at the moment.
Ed, in Jacksonville, Florida, Republican, you're on with Reese Gorman.
What's on your mind?
Yeah, good morning, and thank you for taking my call.
I'd like to know if the, on the NDAA, if the military pay raise stayed at the same percentage of rate that they suggested.
I do believe that the military did, there was a pay raise in the NDAA.