my purpose is to address policy concerns of congress increasing congresses role in elections for congress. here is some background, i took office last year and the elections i supervised as my state's chief election official took place amid the pandemic. i asked the legislation for emergency powers to be shared with our democratic governor that led us to implement temporary changes to our election system to ensure public safety, voter access election security and standard absentee voting and we established early voting for the first time in kentucky history. the days before air june, 2020 primary election, kentucky was singled out in a national campaign of harassment and hate with accusations of voter suppression step our phones were clogged with angry callers from washington, d.c., california and new york sometimes threatening violence. this was directed at us by celebrities on twitter including a certain member of congress who now chairs the senate committee. when the dust settled, kentucky had conducted the most successful election in america at that point in the pandemic step it was s

and at the 1/16 congress. from the hundred 16th congress. -- 116th congress. those materials will be made part of the record. as has been noted, members may have additional questions for witnesses. submit those in writing and we request you answer them if you are able. the record will be open to receive the answers to those questions. i want to think this panel for outstanding testimony today. very enlightening. very smart. a real contribution to our understanding of the constitution, and we thank you. without objection, the committee on house >> tonight on the communicators. >> attacking big tech from all sorts of angles, and this is just one of them. they have coalesced, we need to use more antitrust laws in order to go after the tech companies, but they all have different reasons for doing so, even though they sort of coalesce on the same solutions. democrats, seems to be rooted in a very typical animosity towards just big businesses and skepticism about corporations in general. for republicans it is tied to this cultural or against technology in general. s

my job here is to address policy concerns, congress' role in elections for congress. first some background, i took office last year, and during the pandemic. i asked the legislation for and received powers with the governor to permit changes to the assure access, voter safety and we established absentee voting and early voting for the first time in kentucky history. in the days before our june 2020 primary election, kentucky was singled out in a national campaign of harassment and hate and false accusations of voter suppression. and there were calls cursing at us, steams threatening violence and this was directed at us, and by celebrities on twitter, including a member of congress who now shares the senate committee analogous to yours. when the dust settled, kentucky conducted the most successful election in america to that point, safe, orderly, with high turnout. kentuckians knew better how to conduct an election in kentucky than did the national media or politicians. expanded voting reforms and enhanced security measures we implemented proved so popular, most are ma

congress could also elaborate. second, congress must make it clear that the true threat to our democracy is based is termination, not widespread voter fraud--is race discrimination, not widespread voter fraud. congress could require courts to consider the tenuous in this over the relationship. finally, it is critical that congress make explicit that there is no tolerable level of race discrimination. with these goals in mind, congress can remedy the harm done to the voting rights act. restoring the voting rights act is not enough. congress must pass the for the people act and create a new national standard for voting. this will take some common tactics of restricting voting off the table. we applaud as for doing its part on this already--we applaud the house for doing its part on this already. rep. cohen: thank you, mr. morales. we appreciate your work and your testimony. our next witness is nicholas stephanopoulos, i propose a standard under section two of the act. several justices act about my proposal. and, the

guest: bad on congress pit my last chapter is the incredible, shrinking congress. i served in congress for nine years. i love the institution of congress and i have many dear friends that still serve there. the point i make in the book is the business model of congress is broken. the business model of congress is to blame the other side for not solving the problem because if you work with the other side you are dreadful, bipartisan, something you are going to address in your next tax good if you are bipartisan, you often get primary, and that is a word that did not exist in the english language 20 years ago. #two get reelected, so they moved to the left or the right in order to make sure they do not get primary. that has cost us an enormous amount. it used to be back in the day when i was an aide in the united states 70's -- in the 1970's, working together was pride, members lived in washington, they were friends, and even if they disagree, they disagreed civilly and people were respected when they would bring their bills to the floor, and that seems like a quaint

>> none. >> diderot congress -- did the congress require a to shrink the capital? >> it did not. >> third, what is the maximum size of the seat of government established in the constitution? does it require a minimum size? >> the maximum is 10 miles square. that is the plaintext. there is no minimum size. it is left to the judgment of the province. >> can you speak briefly as to why constitutional amendment is not required nor the norm? can you speak briefly as to why constitutional amendment is not required nor the norm when entering estate into the unions and how the constitution grants congress to make statehood. >> this is just the text of the constitution. constitution article four section three said that congress can admit new states into the union. like every other power given to congress by the constitution unless specifically specified otherwise, that power is compassed by congressional action and then presented to the president. in a small number of cases where something has to be done differently, the constitution specifies it has to be done differently.

and at the 1/16 congress. from the hundred 16th congress. -- 116th congress. those materials will be made part of the record. as has been noted, members may have additional questions for witnesses. submit those in writing and we request you answer them if you are able. the record will be open to receive the answers to those questions. i want to think this panel for outstanding testimony today. very enlightenin >> c-span's or unfiltered view of government. co-funded by these television companies and more and shooting -- including charter communication. >> broadband is a force for environment -- empowerment. that is why it is building infrastructure, upgrading technology, and powering opportunity in communities big and small. charter is connecting us. >> charter communications supports c-span as a public service, along with other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> today, on the communicators -- >> the reason why ransomware has become such a problem is it has become a huge threat, not only a cyber criminal threat but because of the

where is that for congress? who sits you down twice a year and lets you know these are the things that you did well that make congress work better, and here are the ways that you undermined our collective mission and hurt our country. i wonder if you can take some of the time when you're not in session and identify a group of, ideally bipartisan's war respected across parties, who could be tasked with do with that, independent feedback. trying to hold people accountable a little bit for the contributions they make as well as for what's they subtract. >> can you say more? what would that look like? can you put some more meat on that bone? >> yeah, so i guess the starting point for me would be to say let's take a group, let's do a survey of all 435 members of congress and let's find out who are the most respected members across parties. ideally we would find out who is trusted by the opposite party. then we get a group of, let's say, five or seven of those people and they are tasked with doing a review of each mem

alas congress in this hot as congress, i sat through hearings listening to my friends on the other side trying to tell us there is voter suppression happening in republican dates. despite voter turnout breaking records in the 2018 midterms and the 2020 general election, across all races, my friends on the others of the aisle continued to spread a gray just misinformation about what is occurring today. senator joe manchin announced he would vote against hr1 and s1. one of our colleagues from new york said his op-ed should have been titled, "why i'll vote to preserve jim crow." another member from new york called it a voter suppression epidemic. president biden has called these laws un-american, sick, jim crow in the 21st century, and a significant test of our democracy since the civil war. additionally, the president has received for pinocchio's from even the most liberal fact checkers at the washington post for false claims about george's laws. vice president harris suggested voter integrity laws are concerning because people in rural areas do not have a kinko's nearby. i am from a rura

for hr 682 and hr 3412 from the 116th congress. members have additional questions for each of the witnesses and some will submit in writing and request that he would answer to receive the answers to the questions i want to thank the panel for an outstanding testimony today. rwithout objection, the committe on housing administration will stand adjourned. >>> on the national security threats posed by climate change. bill nye, known as the science guy and environmental experts testify about forced migration due to climate change and mitigation efforts to stave off the impacts of severe weather events before they occur. this is two hours. >> the subcommittee on emergency preparedness response and recovery will come to order. the subcommittee is meeting today to receive testimony on examining climate change, a threat to the homeland. without objection, the chair is authorized to declare the subcommittee in recess at any point. i'd like to say good afternoon to all of you and thank you for joining us today for the witnesses as well as th

that congress member vela will vote yes on h.r. 2278. mr. speaker, as the member designated by congress member napolitano, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congress member napolitano will also vote yes on h.r. 2278. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from north carolina seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. carson of indiana, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that mr. carson will vote yes on h.r. 2278. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. jeffries: as the member designated by congresswoman grace meng, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congresswoman meng will vote yea on h.r. 2278. as the member designated by congressman steven horsford, pursuant to house resolution 8, i inform the house that congressman horsford will vote yea on h.r. 2278. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona -- >> as the member designated by mrs. kirkpatrick, p

the number of measures passed by congress in 2020 and 2021. i wanted to look at a couple figures in your latest report. in january 2021 the treasury began analyzing 9 million notices it had to non-filers who may be eligible for the first round of stimulus checks. the treasury does not plan on completing this analysis until fall 2021 after another round of payment -- more than six months after the third round of payments had been issued." guest: these are people who are among the most needy in terms of having the payment. these are people who do not regularly filed taxes because they may not make enough money. the irs has no way to reach them initially easily. they conducted outreach activities through community organizations and others. we believe they should provide more interim analysis to provide help to these outreach organizations so they can help find these people, and encourage them to contact the irs. this is important. we have issued reports about payments that should not have gone to people for fraud or other reasons, but it is equal

and at the 1/16 congress. from the hundred 16th congress. -- 116th congress. those materials will be made part of the record. as has been noted, members may have additional questions for witnesses. submit those in writing and we request you answer them if you are able. the record will be open to receive the answers to those questions. i want to think this panel for outstanding testimony today. very enlightenin >> tonight on q&a, the chief engineer of the historic fireboat on september 11 when it was called back into service to aid firefighters following the attacks on the twin towers. in her book, she tells the story of the community of mariners who came to the rescue of thousands. >> the maritime evacuation that delivered nearly half a million people to safety is an incredible example of the goodness of people that when you are given an opportunity to help, you have the tools, you have the skill set, you have the availability that people over and over again made the choice to put themselves in harm's way for the sake of fellow humans. that is very instructive

congress agreed with that decision. it was enough to show that the political processes leading to the subdivision are not equally open to participation of members of the protected class, in that members have less opportunity to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice. the amendment created a broad statute with congress" to look at the totality of circumstances including social economic circumstances that could make minority voters face extra barriers to voting, as well as the neutral justifications that states could advance for passing restrictive voting rules. although the supreme court interprets section two in interpreting cases, it was not interpreted in vote denial cases in which a state or locality makes it harder for minorities to register to vote. lower courts had read section two to set forth a top standard for overturning a state law but one that could be made in public cases. for example, the fifth circuit, voted the country's most conservative court, held that texas'

my purpose is to address policy concerns with congress increasing their role in elections for congress. first, some background. i took office last year and elections i have supervised all took place amidst the pandemic. i asked legislature for and received emergency powers. the government us to implement temporary changes to our election system to ensure public safety, but her access and election security. we expanded absentee voting. we established early voting for the first time in kentucky history and before our primary collection -- election, kentucky was singled out for a campaign of harassment and hate. our phones were clogged with and we cars from d.c., california and new york, cursing at us and threatening violence. this was brought to us by celebrity's on twitter and certain members of congress. the dust settled, we conducted the most successful election in america at that point. safe, orderly, and with high turnout. the extended voting reforms and security measures wait implement proved so successful and popular. our legislator ate most of them permanent. kentucky is a nation

congress does that. congress adopts the kansas-then act. the assumption from the northwest oernds up to the kansas-nebraska act is that the united states congress is vested with the authority to make the determinations about the status of slavery in the territories. i mean, no matter what decision it makes the northwest ordinance was no slavery. kansas-nebraska it's slavery if you can get a popular majority. but it's congress passing the legislation. congress has the authority to oversee. that's about to change. boy, is it about to change. and it changes because of this gentleman here. the chief justice of the united states supreme court roger brooke taney. appointed to the supreme court by andrew jackson. taney had been a faithful jacks jacquecine yan servant, secretary of the treasury. when facsimile made his war upon the bank of the united states, the hatchett man, so to speak, was roger brooke taney. jackson appoints taney to the supreme court to succeed the famous john marshall. and for more than 20 years taney had been chief justice o

in congress he wanted to become house speaker. he enjoyed being president of the united states and sought to win the presidency in his own right in 1976. he considered running for the presidency again in 1980 and then considered being ronald reagan's running mate that same year. and as an ex-president, he served on numerous corporate boards as well as commitment very involved in politics party gerald ford was a lifelong republican who was a member of the moderate wing of that party and he was loyal to the republican party, but i should point out that loyalty meant that at times he changed his positions on the issues, which i'll say more about your momentarily. and last but not least pragmatism. ford was loyal to his party, but he wasn't an ideologue. he was willing to reach across party lines. grand rapids his hometown was and i believe still is a city mocked by what scholars and ford's contemporaries have referred to as a midwestern form of conservatism. this meant limited government. it meant fiscal frugality. it meant piety but

congress must make it extraordinary difficult if not impossible for the department of to spy on the congress or the news media. we can be rely on the department alone to make these changes. when i saw the reports about members of congress's offices being targeted, mr. swal well, mr. schiff, i was the first and the only republican to say that that was improper. and more of my colleagues should join me. it was easy to believe that the department of justice would do that to the democrats because they threatened to do it to us. i seek unanimous consent to enter into the record fox news publication from september 27, 2018, rosenstein launched hostile attack in may against republicans over russia records. >> without objection. >> rosenstein threatened a member of the republican staff with criminal process if he did not bend to what mr. rosen stein wanted at the time. so it's not hard to believe. the most watched cable news host has been stating for the last several nights that the nsa has been monitoring his communications. and amazingly, the nsa has issued a statement that is so couched, it is fu

congress can make them a priority. yet, cementing law at data speeds as a gaping eligibility factor, you're not even eligible. it could be hamstring your ability to advance other goals you care about. csis moment to promote all your goals. resiliency. spin broadband service to your constituents, providing mobility, public safety like chief johnson here. promoting affordability and fighting climate change. this committee's long-standing approach has enabled the u.s. to build the world strongest in the communications networks, and as senator thune noted be rose to the occasion during this pandemic. we saved the entire economy. is that goals, traditionally, and priorities for agencies to execute. you don't summit and narrow technological standards like specific data speeds. congress should direct agencies to execute your priorities. technologies that promote your goals, compete for funding including fixed and mobile 5g services. wireless networks have low advantages. they tend to go less often in disasters and then to get

that is existing law congress passed it is one of many the ftc has not enforced that congress has told us too bad if congress has told us to enforce the law, we do it. >> i will get more into this as time goes by that when i buy a car, eyes sign a way that information back to the manufacturer. there are many things that we click on and give someone our information. then when we needed to repair or whatever, we don't have that information so if you can keep looking at that defined an equitable way to protect the customer in that way. i yield back. >> congresswoman kelly you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you to the chair and the commissioners for testifying today before the committee and know this past year has been particularly trying for the ftc. also thank you to the chair and the ranking member for holding this legislative hearing and including my bill hr 4460, consumer equity protection act. this will establish a task force within the ftc to advise on and equity issues and the protection of consumers to prevent unfair and deceptive practices targeting consumers on the ba

so congress could decide to do it or not but if congress doesn't do it congress shouldn't say we wish we could but the constitution prevents it. no one has identified anyone in the constitution that prevents it for the simple reason that nothing in the constitution does prevent it. >> thank you, professor primus. mayor bowser, the professor has just mentioned nothing is in the constitution that would prevent this from happening so we also like to think about what perhaps were our founding fathers thinking as they wrote this. so my question to you is do you believe that preserving the status quo in d.c. where residents have no voice in their government, do you think that's what the founding fathers envisioned within they drafted and ratified the constitution? >> absolutely not, senator. we know as we've already discussed that ending taxation without representation was a principle that led to the independence of our nation and it's a glaring contradiction of our democracy that residents of the nation's capital literally people who could look out of their windows and see this building do

first, congress congress should end indefinite secrecy orders for good. we suggest they last for 90 days with a 90 day extension if proven necessary. second, congress must in rubberstamp secrecy orders and require that judges engage in a written analysis of the relevant facts. third, court should apply strict scrutiny when issuing an order or instead only after it has been challenged. finally, congress should codify a statutory right off the rising cloud providers to challenge harmful secrecy orders in order to protect their users rights. let me be clear. secrecy orders are sometimes necessary such as to investigate cyber attacks come to keep our children safe from online exploitation or to prevent terrorist attacks. we don't suggest that the government must meet an impossible standard. we are asking for a meaningful one. notice to targets is an important safeguard for our constitutional rights. reform is necessary to protect the fundamental values that are the bedrock of our democracy. without reform, abuses will continue to occur, and they will occur in

in congress. for the founders no principle was more essential to the constitution and represented in the government. in their time there was no conflict between that principle and a non-state status of washington, d.c., because virtually nobody lived in washington, d.c. today it is a conflict. the number of registered voters in d.c. today is larger than the entire number of voters who participated in all of the elections for all of the conventions that ratified the constitution in all 13 original states together. any constitutional vision that takes representative vision seriously, that's a serious problem. given the importance of the boundaries attached to representative government, it would be strange to conclude that their vision requires us to maintain a situation in which so many american citizens lack representation. and fortunately it doesn't. the constitution they adopted gives congress a tool for solving the problem. that tool gives the power to admit new states and give representation to

and what can congress do? >> intelligence community the department of justice and one of the issues is confusion around the federal agency so to be extremely helpful as we are looking at fresh eyes to be very clear where we want dhs to be the lead federal agency and to support that they should have the lead in two important areas one is in connecting federal resources with officials and also the public and private sectors so what we find is often each department and agency to make those connections is confusing for the recipients to handle back connecting mission that creates allied of clarity and then to do what it does quite well. the other place where multiple folks on the panel agree dhs should be a larger role is communicating to communicate threat information and actions the public and private sector can take. to be the lead communicator of threat information is important way for dhs to invest in the resilience you were just talking about. >> climate change drives the complex of natural disasters drought

his editors in congress were actually doing good work. the raft of changes the delegates made reined in tightened and focused some of the excesses of jefferson's draft. see what you think. here's the jefferson version of a sentence the history of the present king of great. britain is a history of unremitting injuries and use of patients among which appears no solitary fact to contradict the uniform tenor of the rest, but all have in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. that's the committee's draft. here's what the delegates finally end up with. the history of the present king of great britain is a history of repeated injuries and use of patients. or having a direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states as pauline mayer has put it. this is no hack editing job. the delegates who labored over the declaration had a splendid ear for language. they made it better. the result was to be sure a leaner more powerful piece of writing. now a quick question for you. why do you think they

more consumers and american citizens contacted congress in one week than in the history of congress, and it was bad, it will never come up again. this is a no-brainer against lousy tech companies. they were pushed aside and congress made a huge mistake. the same thing could happen here. if these bills become law, we would see all sorts of services consumers love disappear overnight whether it is your ability to use google maps, facetime, big companies cannot have services consumers love for free. or if you get too big your acquisitions cannot be approved. it would end the ability of small companies and investors to have exit strategies relying on big company acquisitions. that is money flow which starts at the bottom. all these investments going to companies -- you can only exit a company three ways. acquisition to a bigger company, or, you could do it going public, but if you take away the first one, you have taken away incentive to invest in companies. some of these policies are absurd. there is so much opposition on both sides and so many questions being raised. having legislation

and the public could access congress reports to congress agencies submit thousands of reports to congress each year this will improve congressional oversight to find and access those reports h.r. 2485 would give the public access to agency reports currently, members of the public often have to file requests under the freedom of information act to obtain reports to congress because many of these reports are not available online and online library of federal reports would improve our ability to use the noar in them to make sound policy i would encourage agency policy requirements -- it would require agency requirements -- compliance with reporting requirements finally, it would support timely access by state and local governments, students, academics and others with the additional benefit with decreasing the burden on agencies to process freedom of information act requests the access to congressionally mandated reports act has been endorsed by 40 organizations i support this bill and i urge all my colleagues to support it thank you, mr. speaker i reserve the speaker pro tempore: the gentlew

because he was running for congress. he didn't want to get married until october because he wanted to handle the primary. as soon as they are married, he wins the election, and they are off to establish a home in washington. by 1950, they have their first child, michael. then jack followed. then steve. and by 1957, susan has arrived. so by 1957, they have four children at home as ford is moving up in leadership ranks and with increasing responsibility on capitol hill. the kids recall that when their dad was home, that he set the briefcase aside and he was a dad to them. he took them fishing, teaches the boys how to use the lawn mower, how to do things around the house, and takes family vacations with them. they go on skiing trips and back to grand rapids. they have the grandparents there in washington on occasion. so in many respects, it is a typical middle class experience except that their dad increasingly has building responsibilities on capitol hill. this is gerald ford's congressional desk from early in his career.

to congress, which he writes with his cabinet. he will come to the senate for his inauguration for his second term as president. kind of keeps it low key, doesn't do the bigger event we saw downstairs in the house of representatives with john adams, which was a much bigger deal. washington going to second term, comes and takes both of office and goes back to work. he didn't really want the big public ceremony to take place. that's something that would change with adams inauguration, and when you move down to washington you have inaugurations at the new capital building. that would be a change. we are growing into what the united states is today. as you look around this room, a lot of the guys that sat here in the senate where the architects of our constitution. senators being chosen by their states, a lot of the guys that had a big impact on the writing that constitution would be then sent by their states to philadelphia. at one of the ones that's not is james madison. he runs into the problem in virginia that patrick henry is one

let the state legislatures continue to appoint the members of congress. gentlemen, if the convention goes further than this, we shall be opening the door to tyranny. ♪ >> patterson's small state plan retained a weak structure of the articles of confederation, but it offered one proposal that would become the cornerstone of the constitution. >> resolved that all acts of the united states in congress shall be the supreme law of the respective states. >> despite this proposal, the small state plan met violent opposition. days and weeks of bitter debate followed. tempers flared, charges of selfish interest, lust for power flew back and forth. as nights and days went by, there seemed little hope of agreement. no man could foretell what the convention would do. with both factions stubbornly holding on, fearing mounting higher and higher, the convention seemed about to dissolve in confusion. suddenly, they heard a moving appeal from washington. >> no, gentlemen. if to please the people we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterwards defend our wor

it rarely happens in one congress. but if you don't do it, if you don't start, and if you don't start from a positive viewpoint as i think chris said, it doesn't get done. so it's tough, but not unprecedented. >> here's another question from the attendee, do you think term limits will be politicized because then the supreme court is an election issue. is this a concern you have thought about and discussed with other progressives when you thought about pushing for term limits at the supreme court? >> it's something that, you know, i've thought about, but i think you can also think about making supreme court appointments more political as also a way of making them more democratic. you actually want the people to have a say about which presidents are selecting supreme court justices, rather than leaving it up to fate, like when a justice decides to retire or if they happen to get ill, so yes, it might be more political in the sense that we're actually having public conversations about whether we want future presidents to

it's not easy to get elected to congress. you don't fall out of bed and get elected to congress or attorney general the state or governor of the state or whatever. it doesn't happen like that. you work your tail off to get elected presumably one of the motivation to have this to make the country country better and then you get into an institution where you really can't do that because you were on one side and they are on the other side and the efforts to work together are basically discounted and politically dangerous. >> host: i totally agree with that. we are coming almost to the end of our time together. let me just ask you if you could give a few closing reflections on what you think are the major risks facing the country today as opposed to when you came to congress. >> guest: let's start with where we just ended, toxic partisanship. as we stand today we are watching a couple of things were in the last weeks watching a couple of things happen in the republican caucus in the house. liz cheney the daughter dick cheney who

we served in congress together as i talk about in the book. i've tried to - i did help him become minority leader of the united states house of representatives. and so we had a different kind of a relationship than one would normally have with a president. but i would walk in to him over and over and there're going to be - there are or will soon be memos on my web site where i just say precisely what i said. and what i would do is say look, i think you're doing this flat wrong. let me tell you why. one time he was getting ready to give a speech on the win program the whip inflation now program, and i read it, came to me late, and, he'd already scheduled time for the congress and i read it and i went in to him and i said look, this is not good enough for a precedence, simply is not going to do the job. simply the truth, the truth is this is an enormously important issue. the economy was in the tank and that you're not satisfied with what the economist and your team have put together, and you're going to go back to the drawing board and by golly

so as congress considers ways to expand housing access to all americans, i would encourage congress to understand the housing challenges in communities like erie and to critically assess the performance of tax credit programs in these communities. thank you again for giving me this opportunity, and i look forward to your questions. >> a great presentation. i'm interested in erie because i come from a large city myself, and instead of losing population, we grew our population. every town is different. i think you started to talk about that in the midst of what you were presenting to us, john, and you did a great job for us. i was visualizing this movement in my own mind, from the very beginning, to now in front of us. choosing the right plan is so critical to what you want to do. so thank you for your presentation. i appreciate it. now, we're going to turn back to stacy berger. she's the president and ceo of the housing and community development network of new jersey. i'm grateful for her dedication to creating affordable housing and revitalizing communities in my state. one of the prob

you will see i have in a large the revenue of powers to the congress. maintained the principle of equal representation for every state. >> i am particularly pleased with this. your proposition that the executive should be appointed by the congress and not by the people. >> yes. and to let the state legislatures continue to appoint the members of congress. gentlemen, if the convention goes further than this, we shall be opening the door to charity. >> patterson's small state plan retained a weak structure of the articles of confederation. but offered one proposal that was to become the cornerstone of the constitution. >> result. that all acts of the united states in congress shall be the supreme law of the respective states. >> despite this proposal, the small estate plan met and violent opposition. days and weeks of bitter debate followed. tempers flared, charges of selfish interest, less for power flew back and forth. as nights and days went by, there seem to be little hope. no man can tell what the convention would do. both factions stubbornly holding

generally that's either because congress once to either avoid blame. kind of deflect responsibility to some other actor and then have that proposal that someone else move through in a protected way or it's because congress once to enhance visibility to oversee the executive branch. reconciliation is probably the most consequential of these debate limitations in the senate. but again,it's not the only one . and i think that as we think about the use of reconciliation in the very contemporary congress, mulling over the degree to which having reconciliation as this filibuster protected option for moving certain types of legislation has potentially helped keep the filibuster around. because reconciliation exists as a consistent outlet or certain types of policy changes so you sort of can say do that through reconciliation. that can't be filibustered but that will keep the filibuster around legislation in general. i sort of brought up the idea here that over time, reconciliation has become this tool of the majority party in the senate to pursue its goals. h

he has testified 18 times in front of congress. he has been on every news show you can imagine more than once you can go a day without seeing him on tv but now the select committee won't bring him in for a public hearing to address these issues. no. it will be private the "washington post" and the wall street journal things we should get to the bottom of it pretty much everybody does except the democrats on the select committee so i at least the majority will join the minority to give the unredacted e-mails on february t where these guys got their stories straight to mislead the american public over the origins of the virus and i yield back. >> i would like to say in view of the comments with the briefing has to do with the members of this committee to be better informed with the delta variant but it is not. >> why not make it public the american people want to be informed as well. >> we can make a decision after we hear it but as of this moment it will be a private briefing. with that, thank you to the witnesses for their testimon

we'll do it according to the oath we took as members of congress. but more importantly, we have to get to the bottom of finding out all the things that went wrong on january 6. i look forward to working with the members of the select committee, both democrat and republicans. i chair the house homeland security committee. we have a reputation of being one of the more bipartisan committees in congress. and that's because we work hard at it. i look forward to coming up with the causes and effect. it will come in due time. i can't give it -- a time line. we'll let the facts help determine how long we will meet. but i assure you that the product will be a product based on investigation, based on what those investigations bring forth , and there's nothing sack crow -- in this review that won't be brought out in the end. thank you. speaker pelosi: any questions? no questions? i anticipated them all. yes, sir. reporter: house minority leader mccarthy -- speaker pelosi: we are out -- making our presentation here, go ask him about what he says, ok. reporter:

not easy to get elected to congress we don't follow the bed and get elected to congress or attorney general of state or governor of state or whatever. so, you're could tell off to get elected butge presumably, the motivations you have assuming the country better pretty and you get into an institution where you can't do that. because you on one side and they are on the other side and the efforts to work together are basically discounted. and politically dangerous. janet: i totally agree with that predict were almost to the end of our time together pretty coming ask you if you give a few closing reflections on what you think are the major risks facing the country today. as opposed too when you came to congress. jane: toxic partisanship. as we speak today, we are watching a couple of things, from the last week's happening in the republican caucus in the house. liz cheney the daughter of s cheney, who bravely spoke truth got kicked out of ownership of the republican side. a lot of jokes were made about her and her father. but she's a serious member of congress. whether you agree with her or not

very much like in congress. this is an argument that as you know from when you were recruiting candidates to run for congress when you were head of the d triple c she would consider running and they would say didn't have the right experience, their experience was mostly in the home, and i believe, tell me if this is right, she would tell them the same story that the skills you gain by being a mother or not dissimilar from what you need to bring to washington. did you hear her make that argument? >> many times, and it usually worked. before i send it over there was a famous quote that speaker pelosi used in a white house meeting with president trump when he began yelling at her one of them please don't characterize the strength of the meeting but another was more directed at the experiences. >> where she said i recognize a temper tantrum when i see one. she came back with a meeting and shrugged off the fact that he had -- i recognize a temper tantrum when i see one. i can tell you i don't know what he said when h

what are the implications for congress? we gained experience with elected officials in minnesota, maryland and new jersey. in terms of congress, we did a red blue workshop with the minnesota staff members. we're piloting new ways to do congressional town halls. based on this work, i have three recommendations to the select committee for how congress can foster depdepolarization. first, promote red blue workshops for congressional staffs and committee staffs. i suggest beginning with the staffs of members of this select committee. people talk about things such as what life experiences have influenced their attitudes and beliefs about public policy and the public good. we found that question. perhaps members of this committee could go first with these one to one conversations. third, encourage members of congress to adopt new methods with groups of constituents in order to model depolarization back in their districts. thai using 19th century designs. it's time for modernization. for all of these action steps, braver angels ha