House Democratic Leaders Hakeem Jeffries and Ted Lieu condemn political violence following the White House correspondents dinner shooting, then pivot to demanding FBI Director Kash Patel's removal as a precondition for FISA reauthorization due to trustworthiness concerns. They criticize Republican priorities including $70 billion in ICE funding and attacks on LGBTQ children while promoting a bipartisan AI fraud bill. Addressing the DHS funding impasse, they urge Speaker Johnson to pass Senate legislation protecting FEMA and TSA by May 1st, rejecting super PAC influence and highlighting the urgent need to resolve unpaid employee expenses through immediate compromise. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
Source
Time
Text
FISA Renewal and AI Authority00:14:37
The first indictment against Mr. Comey, charging him with making false statements and obstruction of Congress, was dismissed after a federal judge ruled that the government prosecutor was improperly appointed to her position.
House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries was joined by party lawmakers for a news conference on the Democratic agenda.
The vice chair of the caucus, Ted Lieu, said he would support FISA reauthorization if FBI Director Kash Patel were removed from office.
Members also discussed affordability, artificial intelligence, and funding for the Department of Homeland Security.
Good morning.
Honored to be back here with Vice Chair Ted Lieu.
First, I want to say how grateful we are that everyone is safe after the shooting this weekend, and we're so thankful for the quick actions of the United States Secret Service and law enforcement to stop the gunmen.
Political violence is never acceptable and should always be condemned.
Now, as investigations continue into the incident, I want to turn our attention to the House floor and Republicans' agenda this week.
Right now, the American people are struggling, and they're getting crushed behind the weight of increased costs.
Americans can't afford to fill up their gas tanks and their kids going to school and going to work, and those costs driving up.
They can't pay for groceries to feed their families, and health care has become so expensive, they're skipping doctors' visits and treatments altogether.
But rather than working with Democrats to tackle these pressing issues and actually help hardworking families, House Republicans are pushing bills to attack LGBTQ children, a farm bill that hurts our farmers and favors corporations, and a reconciliation bill that gives another $70 billion to ICE and Border Patrol so they can continue to harass lawful immigrants, detain children, and terrorize our communities.
These taxpayer dollars could be used to improve Americans' lives by extending health care credits, reversing the GOP cuts to food assistance, and helping Americans afford rent.
But it's clear Speaker Johnson and House Republicans don't have the priorities of Americans in mind.
It doesn't have to be this way.
Democrats have been calling on Republicans for over a year to join us on policies that drive down costs and prioritize Americans' costs that they're facing.
And while Republicans continue their partisan go-it-alone approach, Democrats will continue using every tool at our disposal to improve the lives of hardworking families.
Vice Chair Ted Liu.
Thank you, Chairman Aguilar.
Political violence is never acceptable, and I'm grateful no one was injured with the shooting at the White House correspondents dinner.
I know that some of you in this room were at that dinner, and I am sorry that you've now joined the growing list of Americans who have been affected by gun violence.
I urge the Department of Justice to prosecute the shooter to the fullest extent of the law.
FISA Section 702 is a big controversy right now in Congress, and I want the American people to understand why there is this controversy.
It's because FISA Section 702 allows the FBI to spy on Americans.
And many Democrats and some Republicans simply want a warrant requirement because the U.S. Constitution demands that you need warrants under the Fourth Amendment if you're going to spy on Americans.
It is not a complicated or difficult concept.
But there's another reason why this FISA reauthorization is having such problems.
It's because of the FBI director himself.
Kash Patel is a major obstacle to getting to a FISA deal.
And it's because many members of Congress simply do not trust Kash Patel.
Based on public reporting, it appears Kash Patel is a raging alcoholic.
There's also videotape of him flying to the Olympics on taxpayers' dime and partying and drinking.
There's also an article from the New York Times that alleges that Kash Patel had his FBI agents query FBI databases to go after a New York Times reporter who wrote an unflattering story about how Patel was using taxpayers' money to fly his girlfriend around on private jets.
So we can't trust Kash Patel.
And if the administration removed Kash Patel, it would make FISA reauthorization, I believe, a much easier thing to do.
And now I want to talk a little bit about the economy.
Inflation, based on last CPI report, skyrocketed.
It was the largest month-to-month increase.
It was 3.3% in a number of years.
Gas prices are continuing to be very, very high.
And what is Donald Trump focused on?
Building a giant arch in Washington, D.C. and building a private ballroom with taxpayers' dollars at $400 million for a ballroom that 99% of Americans will never be able to access.
This is really just for the elite.
We urge Republicans and Donald Trump to focus on American people instead.
Questions?
Michael.
You'll be happy, Mr. Chairman, my question.
This week is actually for the Vice Chair.
Love it.
I love when we start out our meetings like this.
You and Mr. Obodalte released an artificial intelligence bill that kind of would codify some of the recommendations from the task force last Congress.
I'm curious if any of them, what specific provisions are you most proud of?
Are there any that you particularly fought to make it in there?
And do you see a path forward this Congress, or is this something that the American people are going to have to wait for next Congress in the event that you all take the majority?
Or is this something that you feel like could get through at least the House this Congress of Florida?
Thank you for your question.
Congressman Oberno D and I co-chaired the House Bipartisan Task Force on Artificial Intelligence last term.
We introduced a bipartisan bill that implements a number of the recommendations.
And this is a bill designed to pass this term.
So it focuses on common sense provisions such as cracking down on AI fraud, on having the federal government follow their NIST risk management guidelines, on making sure we increase AI literacy and AI education.
These are a lot of common sense provisions that we believe can pass this term.
That is the goal of this piece of legislation.
Common sense piece of legislation, and I appreciate the vice chair's work with Representative Obernolty on it.
Feel free to follow Michael's lead.
Riley?
Huh?
I actually do not have a ball up on AI.
I love it.
I love it.
Congressman Liu, can you talk a little bit about your advice to Democrats on how they should be talking about AI when they get questions from constituents, from voters?
What do you think members of Congress should be messaging on to say?
Sure.
So both Democrats and Republicans can vote for the bill that Oberno-D and I just introduced.
The bill is bipartisan.
It addresses common sense provisions.
Separate from that, Leader Jeffries has created the AI Commission, and it is co-chaired by Josh Gottheimer, Valier Fouchy, and myself.
And we're working on a framework to provide a leader, Jeffries, for when Democrats foot the House and gain control next term as to what Democrats would do.
As far as we can tell, the Republican strategy so far has been to suppress AI legislation at the federal level, suppress it at the state level and fail to do so, and then sell high-performance chips to China.
That is not a strategy that helps America, and we're working on creating a framework.
And so what we want to do is make sure that we continue to innovate in AI, but also have reasonable guardrails to make sure it doesn't harm Americans.
Q Mayfield.
Thank you.
I know there's been some trouble when House Republicans reauthorizing FISA this week, as you both kind of mentioned.
If Republicans can't reach sort of a deal on their own and they try to put forward another or two-week long FISA extension just to get more time to negotiate, is that something that Democrats would support, kind of as you allowed unanimous consent last time?
Look, 702 is an important national security priority for our country.
We are willing to engage in conversations, but look, we had a window.
I mean, part of what the exercise that we went through was assurances from the majority that they would give us the bill in advance, which you saw that they did post the text well in advance of the vote.
Jim Himes and Jamie Raskin are ready to engage in conversations.
At this point, Republican leadership hasn't engaged in those conversations.
It's clear, based on the reforms that were implemented during the Biden administration, in order for FISA to get done, it has to be bipartisan.
I just don't understand why Republicans can't figure that out and don't want to include the top Democrat on Intel and judiciary.
So we'll see what happens.
But clearly, Republicans are just wrapped around the axle right now, and their inability to govern is shaping the floor schedule as we speak.
If Kash Patel was removed, I would vote for another short-term extension of FISA so that we can come together for a bipartisan solution, as the chairman has said.
Nick?
Speaker Johnson has brought up the idea of passing a different DHS funding bill than the one the Senate sent to the vote.
Is that something you can see Democrats supporting?
Look, we'll see what the details are of this.
He talks about drafting errors.
When the Senate passed their bill unanimously, by the way, Speaker Johnson said clearly that that would come up in a matter of days.
I don't know what the problem is.
He hasn't identified to us what the issue is.
It's clear that we should hold harmless TSA, FEMA, Coast Guard, United States Secret Service, CISA, those elements from our DHS discussions that we have reasonable policy disagreements with the administration on ICE and CBP.
Democrats have been willing for over 60 days now to pass a bill like the Senate passed.
I just don't understand why Speaker Johnson can't take yes for an answer and put this bill up, but we'll see what the quote-unquote drafting errors are that he mentions and we'll view it on its merits.
But I can't imagine right now that would again have to go back to the Senate.
So we're talking about more time delays.
Most Americans don't know much about FISA.
Can you explain to the viewers at home what actually happens and what the risks are if there is a lapse?
It's clear, the vice chair I'll ask to help me out here too as his judiciary member.
It is unquestioned that FISA authority is utilized to stamp out violent attacks and terror extremists who want to pose harm to the United States.
It is authority that has been utilized by multiple presidents and both parties.
There is a robust process that got even more burdensome to ensure protections for U.S. citizens as a result of the Biden-era reforms.
But it is authority that allows the United States government to collect data on non-U.S. citizens who pose a danger to the United States after rigorous checks along the way.
That is fundamentally what it does.
Over 60, 70 percent, depending on which administration you talk to, of the president's daily briefing is derived from these types of from this information as source material.
It is vital to our national security interest, and that's why Democrats have been at the table the entire time supporting its efforts.
Now, that doesn't mean that it can't be reformed, and that doesn't mean that we can't do a better process.
The reforms have been positive, but there's more that we can do, and Jamie Raskin and Jim Himes have both articulated areas in which we can do more to protect U.S. citizens' data when it is incidentally collected.
Chairman Aguiler is correct, and let me just add, FISA Section 702 primarily does two things.
It allows the United States government to spy on suspected foreign terrorists.
No one has a problem with that.
It's the second thing FISA Section 702 does that many members of Congress have a problem with.
It allows the FBI to spy on Americans.
And we're simply asking for a warrant requirement when the FBI does that.
Now, if it takes some time to get to a bipartisan solution, again, I would vote for a short-term extension if FBI Director Kash Patel was removed.
Max?
There's a letter this week led by Bernie Sanders to the DNC chair that called on Democratic candidates to reject all super PAC funding in primaries.
Do you think this is a good idea?
To my knowledge, Democratic candidates can't coordinate with super PACs, so I don't understand what the utility of saying we don't support super PACs.
We don't talk to super PACs.
We don't have any knowledge of what they do.
Super PACs are independent organizations.
What Democrats want to do is we want to prevent dark money, including super PAC money.
We want to ensure that it's as transparent as possible, and Democrats would do away with dark money if we could.
Super PAC Funding Controversy00:06:32
But right now, what would be the utility of super PAC money just on one side of the political aisle supporting Republicans doesn't make much sense.
It's nothing that we could control, and we would encourage our candidates running in top-tier racists to just focus on their race and focus on winning.
Eric?
Is there any appetite for that much of an increase or any real defense increase among Democrats?
Democrats support protecting our national security, and Democrats have supported in a bipartisan way reasonable growth of our DOD and Pentagon budget, especially in light of supply chain concerns and other costs that have arisen.
But what the administration proposes is a non-starter.
We're willing to be at the table, but you cannot cut health care and supplemental nutrition.
You cannot cut programs that Americans rely on, all for the purpose of defense.
We cannot support a budget that only supports the DOD and Pentagon and Pete Hegseth while turning our back on the American people and the struggles that they face.
And so that's why Democrats have always fought for parity and labor health and the different types of appropriations subcommittee marks that we see.
And so we're going to continue to have that discussion in the Appropriations Committee, but what they've proposed right now just doesn't have the support.
I cannot support more money for the Department of Defense until they come up with a new strategy based on the lessons we've already learned from the Iran war.
Because when we're dealing with peer adversaries like China and Russia, the U.S. is going to face some major problems.
Here are three things we've learned already from this war in Iran.
Number one, the U.S. will run out of munitions, defensive munitions, in any prolonged conflict.
We've been in the war against Iran for less than two months, and we've depleted a significant number of our defensive munitions.
Second, even with the defensive munitions we have, based on public reporting, Iran, which is a second-rate military, has struck numerous U.S. bases, causing significant damage.
That means that any prolonged conflict with China or Russia or overseas bases will be obliterated by a better military.
And then third, their money is unsustainable.
One Patriot missile costs between $4 and $4.5 million.
An Iranian drone costs about $30,000 to $50,000.
This is like launching Ferraris at Frisbee's.
We cannot sustain this.
And so until the Department of Defense comes up with a new strategy, they should not be asking for any more funds.
Mike?
On the farm bill, you would criticize me in your remarks, but there were Democrats on the committee who voted for this move to the floor, and presumably they will support it on the floor.
We were just talking to the ranking member downstairs, Ms. Craig, and she was asking leadership to whip against it.
Do you plan to whip against that bill and are you in the afternoon?
Realizing that we don't know when that's going to come to the floor.
Yeah, Clark will make the decisions with the leadership team and the leader on what we whip.
But right now, I feel pretty confident that neither Vice Chair Liu or I will support the farm bill if it comes to the floor.
Obviously, first they got to pass a rule.
Tell me if they're going to pass a rule to put this on the floor and we'll have a better headcount.
But look, we object to the policy, and I think that an overwhelming amount of Democrats will object to the policy.
We want to do everything we can to help farmers in this country, farmers who have been hurt by Donald Trump's tariffs.
And I think some members want to help.
But the overwhelming cuts that we see in this farm bill are too detrimental to our communities for the majority of Democrats to support.
Thanks, Mike.
Bill?
Thank you.
When it comes to DHS funding, the administration has been able to pay some folks in different agencies, Coast Guard, Secret Service, using one big beautiful bill funds.
Secretary Mullen says he's going to run out of those funds by early next week.
There have been stories about different employees having to put work expenses on personal credit cards linked to their own credit scores.
They're not getting reimbursed right now.
For the employees watching this who don't really care about the politics, these back and forth, what do you guys just want them to know?
They just feel like they're never going to get paid at this point.
Yeah, it's what I tell TSA workers who have a conversation with me in airports.
There is a bipartisan solution on the House floor at the desk of the Speaker.
He is choosing right now not to put it forward.
This isn't about politics.
This is every member of the Senate, no objections, sending a bill to the Speaker asking him to act to fund them, to pay them on May 1st, which is when Secretary Mullen says we run out of that authority or those funds.
It's shameful that we're in this position after Speaker Johnson said he would put this up within days.
Outside the politics from a human perspective, we understand and we don't want them to be hurt when we have policy disagreements.
And that's why there's a solution, and that's why for over 60 days, Democrats have pushed this same solution before the Senate took it up.
This was a Rosa DeLoro bill that would hold harmless FEMA TSA Coast Guard, United States Secret Service, and CISA.
So that's what we tell folks, and we hope that they understand, but we also want them to know that we feel for what they're going through.
Maybe?
Thank you.
I just wanted to follow up on Monday on the show.
You said that you would vote for a 7-0-2 short-term extension in exchange for the firing of Cache Patel.
I just wanted to ask Leader Aguilar if that's something that you would do as well.
Look, we'll see what the substance is.
None of us would lose any sleep if Kash Patel was the next administration person to leave the door.
I'm certain it would be helpful in other areas.
I specifically use the word remove, not fired, because certainly I'm okay if he was made the super secret agent for the shield of the Americas.
Thank you.
Kash Patel Appointment Debate00:00:49
C-SPAN's Washington Journal, our live forum inviting you to discuss the latest issues in government, politics, and public policy from Washington, D.C. to across the country.
Coming up Wednesday morning, Nebraska Republican Congressman Don Bacon will talk about the latest on the Iran War, the Farm Bill, and Congressional News of the Week.
And then Virginia Democratic Congressman James Wackenshaw will discuss the Epstein investigation, the latest on the Iran War, and more news and issues from Congress.
Later, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression's Greg Lukyanov on the state of free speech in America.
And Neil Irwin of Axios previews tomorrow's Federal Reserve meeting and current U.S. economic condition.
C-SPAN's Washington Journal.
Join the conversation live at 7 Eastern Wednesday morning on C-SPAN, C-SPAN Now, our free mobile app, or online.