| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
Hearing on Trump's NOAA Nominee
00:02:25
|
||
|
unidentified
|
But if I wanted to see a load of people stuck in the past and fighting each other, I'd probably go to the next meeting of the Shadow Cabinet. | |
| Earlier today, President Trump's nominee to be the administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration testified with others at a confirmation hearing before the Senate Commerce Committee. | ||
| The hearing comes following the devastating floods in Texas, which has drawn renewed scrutiny toward the Trump administration's cuts to national weather and climate research agencies, such as NOAA, which includes the National Weather Service. | ||
| Watch the hearing tonight at 8 o'clock Eastern on C-SPAN. | ||
| C-SPAN now, our free mobile video app, or online at c-span.org. | ||
| Next, Senate Party leaders updating reporters on President Trump's agenda. | ||
| They talk about the recently passed tax and spending cuts bill, as well as possible sanctions against Russia before the Senate recesses in August. | ||
| This is just under 20 minutes. | ||
| Good afternoon, everyone. | ||
| Hope everybody caught up on their sleep. | ||
| We had an incredibly successful week last week when we passed the reconciliation bill. | ||
| It was incredibly meaningful and historic legislation. | ||
| And I think just in terms of what we'll do to make our country safer, stronger, and more prosperous is a remarkable achievement. | ||
|
Lot at Stake in Trade Talks
00:05:42
|
||
| And frankly, there were so many components of the bill that in and of themselves would have been historic in terms of getting those things done. | ||
| But combine them into one. | ||
| If you think about the military readiness provisions that are included in there, talk about the transformational investment in border security, talk about unlocking American energy dominance, talk about making the tax relief of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent. | ||
| Those are all remarkable achievements in and of themselves. | ||
| And couple that with a lot of the savings that we achieved in terms of trying to get the government on a more sustainable fiscal path, I think, too, was a remarkable achievement. | ||
| So I'm grateful to and proud of our team, all the committees that were involved in this, all of our members that were involved in the floor exercise. | ||
| Truly something that, at least in my time here, I don't think we've done anything quite like it. | ||
| That said, there's a lot more work to do, and we're not going to let up from our foot on the gas. | ||
| We have this week in particular and the weeks ahead, a lot of nominees that are in the pipeline that we're going to try and get across the finish line, and that without any cooperation or help, total obstruction, total delay, total blockage on the part of the Democrats. | ||
| In fact, President Trump is the first president going back to the Hoover administration, who hasn't had a single one of his NOMs confirmed either by voice vote or by unanimous consent. | ||
| That's the level of obstruction we're seeing from the Democrats. | ||
| And that includes even bipartisan NOMs, NOMs that we know have a lot of support on both sides of the aisle. | ||
| So we're going to keep pressing forward. | ||
| Notwithstanding that, we think that the path that we're on, the track that we're on, is the right one for the country. | ||
| We're going to do everything we can to ensure that President Trump's nominees get in place. | ||
| And then obviously, we've got a lot of other work ahead of us in the weeks and months ahead. | ||
| So it's full speed ahead. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We've done our recisions. | |
| After this current recisions package, how many additional precisions packages do you expect this year? | ||
| I don't know the answer to that. | ||
| This is the one that the administration submitted. | ||
| So, you know, obviously it's got a Friday next week deadline to process it. | ||
| So we'll have it up on the floor next week. | ||
| Hopefully we get on it. | ||
| And then we'll have an amendment process. | ||
| And I think kind of like a budget reconciliation bill, it's an open amendment process, a voterama type process, which I'm sure you're very excited about. | ||
| But I'm hoping that as we get on that bill, we can see some savings achieved that will complement the things that we already accomplished in reconciliation. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Leaders, Japan and South Korea are two of our most important security and trade partners. | |
| In fact, we have trade agreements with both of them in technology and agriculture. | ||
| Why does it make sense not threatening these two important allies with a 25% tariff? | ||
| Well, I mean, I think we've made great headway. | ||
| I was in both Japan and South Korea last August with Bill Haggerty, who was the ambassador to Japan in the first Trump administration. | ||
| And there were a lot of conversations around creating a trilateral trade agreement where our countries would all have an open and fair trading process. | ||
| I think notwithstanding the progress that we've made, and I can speak from personal experience, they've opened up, Japan has, in the last few years, to American beef, which is something that previously we'd had a lot of issues with with regard to tariffs. | ||
| So I'm hoping that the administration, by getting Japan and South Korea to the table, can create the kind of trading relationship that will be economically beneficial not only to the United States, but to Japan and South Korea, and that will further isolate China. | ||
| And I think when there are good, strong economic relationships, it also has the tangential benefit of strengthening national security. | ||
| We have a lot of interests, a lot at stake in that region of the world. | ||
| So I hope as the administration works through this, the conversations that they're having with Japan and South Korea that the ultimate end state will be an agreement that opens up trade among our nations and creates that kind of a trilateral trading relationship. | ||
|
unidentified
|
There are reports of the Secretary of Defense and the latter will help that aid to Ukraine as was authorized by Congress and that even the White House recently did that. | |
| Are you concerned about that breakdown in communication and do you think it's important for the Secretary of Defense to maintain that to provide that aid to Ukraine? | ||
| And are you concerned about the question of the confidence? | ||
| Well, I mean, I think the President echoed the importance and need to continue to support and allow Ukraine to defend itself and to provide the weaponry that's necessary for them to do that. | ||
| And how that's communicated between the White House, between the President and the Secretary of Defense, they'll have to work that out. | ||
| But I think the President's statement about that is the definitive one. | ||
| And I think that's one that would be echoed and shared by a lot of folks up here on both sides of the aisle. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Can you tell us if you have a plan to bring this Graham sanctions bill to the floor before the August recession? | |
| I hope that we can get it on the floor before the August recess. | ||
| We are working with the administration, with the House to try and get it in a form where it's ready. | ||
| Obviously, there is a tremendous amount, as you know, of bipartisan support here in the Senate. | ||
| I think that's shared in the House of Representatives. | ||
| At least I hope that it is. | ||
| And the White House obviously is very engaged in trying to get it in a form that we can transact it and move it across the floor of the Senate. | ||