♪ ♪ >> WELCOME TO "AT ISSUE".

I'M H WAYNE WILSON AND EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE KEEP TABS ON OUR LOCAL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

RIGHT NOW IS THE PERFECT TIME TO HAVE THE CENTRAL ILLINOIS DISTRICT 18 DARIN LAHOOD ON "AT ISSUE" BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH TO DISCUSS, SO MUCH.

WE HAVE ONE HALF HOUR, SO WE'LL GET TO IT.

BEFORE THAT, I WANT TO SAY CONDOLENCES TO YOU ON YOUR LOSS OF YOUR MOTHER-IN-LAW BONNIE NOBLE.

>> H, THANK YOU.

IT IS GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONDOLENCES ON BONNIE.

SHE WILL BE DEARLY MISSED, BUT SHE WILL NOT BE FORGOTTEN.

>> AND LET'S MOVE FORWARD TO -- LET'S GET CORONAVIRUS OUT OF THE WAY FIRST BEFORE WE HAVE SO MANY ISSUES.

I HAVE SEEN THE NUMBER OF DEATHS GROW, THE NUMBER OF CASES GROW,¦ AND WE HEAR ABOUT THE DELTA VARIANT, BUT ONE THING STRUCK ME TWO DAYS AGO.

ONE IN 500 AMERICANS ARE NOW DEAD SINCE THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC HAS STARTED.

THAT IS JUST IN A YEAR AND A HALF.

ONE IN 500.

FOR SOME REASON THAT NUMBER JUST HIT ME RIGHT IN THE GUT.

WHAT CAN WE DO TO GET OURSELVES, AS A NATION, OUT OF THIS CONTINUAL, WELL, WE THINK WE'RE DONE, THEN ANOTHER SPIKE?

DO YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION?

>> WELL, H, I MEAN, WE'VE MADE SOME PROGRESS, BUT WE STILL HAVE A LONG WAYS TO GO, IN MY VIEW.

YOU MENTIONED IT.

WE ARE UP TO CLOSE TO 670,000 DEATHS IN THE UNITED STATES OVER 4 MILLION WORLDWIDE WITH THE PANDEMIC AND THE CORONAVIRUS AND NOW THE DELTA VARIANT.

ON THE POSITIVE SIDE, WE ARE UP TO ABOUT 64% THAT HAVE AT LEAST GOTTEN ONE SHOT, BUT WE HAVE, AGAIN, A LOT LONGER WAY TO GO.

I HAVE SAID PUBLICLY THAT THE VACCINE, IN MY VIEW, IS IMPORTANT TO GET.

I PUBLICLY PROMOTED WHEN I GOT THE VACCINE, WHEN MY WIFE DID AND WE GOT OUR THREE KIDS VACCINATED VACCINATED.

WE BELIEVE IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

I PUBLICLY PROMOTED THAT.

BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT MANY OF OUR RURAL AREAS AND MANY URBAN AREAS, THERE IS STILL A VACCINE HESITANCY OUT THERE.

WHAT I TELL PEOPLE, LISTEN, I DON'T THINK POLITICIAN SHOULD BE THE ONES NECESSARILY SHOULD BE PROMOTING THIS.

I HAVE SAID TALK TO YOUR MEDICAL PERSONAL, A DOCTOR OR NURSE YOU CARE ABOUT.

DON'T LISTEN TO THE CONSPIRACY THEORIES OUT THERE.

I THINK THAT IS DETRIMENTAL LONG TERM.

IN MY VIEW OF SEEING HOW THE VACCINE HAS WORKED, REALLY YOU HAVE TWO CHOICES NOW, YOU GET THE VACCINE OR YOU GET COVID.

IF YOU GET COVID AND HAVE A PREEXISTING CONDITION OR HEALTH CONDITION, YOU MAY BE IN TROUBLE.

WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO PROMOTE THAT.

FRANKLY, I DON'T THINK THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION HAS DONE A GOOD ENOUGH JOB WORKING, FOR INSTANCE, IN OUR AFRICAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITIES AND URBAN AREAS.

SOMEONE LIKE AN OPRAH WINFREY, ATHLETES TO DO PUBLIC PROMOTING OF THE VACCINE.

SAME IN OUR RURAL AREAS, TOO.

I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE MORE OF THAT.

CONTINUE TO PUSH TO WORKING WITH THESE GROUPS IN DIFFERENT AREAS TO DO THAT.

>> BEFORE WE TALK MONEY, LET'S TALK AFGHANISTAN.

WE WITHDREW ON AUGUST 31st.

OF COURSE, THERE WAS A LONG 20-YEAR HISTORY AND THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT IN EARLY 2020 UNDER THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION THAT WE WOULD WITHDRAW ON MAY 1 OF THIS YEAR.

THAT WAS EXTENDED TO AUGUST 31st.

YOUR OPINION ON HOW WE DID IN GETTING AMERICANS AND APPROPRIATE REFUGEES FROM AFGHANISTAN?

>> WELL, H, I'M PROUD TO SERVE ON THE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE IN THE HOUSE.

AND I HAVE BEEN VERY CRITICAL OF THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION OVER THE LAST 60 DAYS IN THEIR AFGHANISTAN POLICY OR THEIR LACK OF POLICY.

I THINK IT WAS AN EPIC FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP IN WHAT OCCURRED AND IT DIDN'T HAVE TO HAPPEN THIS WAY.

I THINK THEY WERE HEAVILY FIX SATED TO GET OUT BY AUGUST 31st SO THEY COULD SAY WE WERE OUT OF 9/11.

THE INFORMATION BY THE MILITARY SHOWED THE AFGHAN ARMY WAS NOT STRONG AND WAS GOING TO EVAPORATE.

WHAT WE SHOULD HAVE DONE IN RETROSPECTS IS HAVE A CONDITIONS-BASED WITHDRAW.

MEANING IF CONDITIONS WEREN'T MET, FOR INSTANCE, IF WE WEREN'T ABLE TO GET OUT OUR $85 MILLION IN ARMENTS THAT WERE THERE, IF WE ARE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO LET THE TALIBAN TAKE BACK OVER.

BAGRAM AIR FORCE BASE, WE SHOULD HAVE KEPT THAT LONG TERM.

WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER AGREED TO RELEASE OF PRISONERS.

I WAS ONE WHO CRITICIZED IN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION THE PROPOSED MEETING AT CAMP DAVID.

I DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER LOST THE 13 MARINES IN AFGHANISTAN.

I BLAME THAT ON THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND THE PRESIDENT'S NATIONAL SECURITY TEAM.

THEY SHOULD HAVE DONE A BETTER JOB LISTENING TO THE INTELLIGENCE AND THEY DIDN'T DO THAT.

IT REALLY WAS AN EPIC FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP >> WAS PART OF THE PROBLEM PART OF THE FACT THAT TRUMP ADMINISTRATION MAY 1 INITIAL DATE NEGOTIATED WITH THE TALIBAN AND EXCLUDED THE AFGHAN ADMINISTRATION?

>> BIDEN'S TEAM WAS FIX SATED BY GETTING OUT BEFORE SEPTEMBER 11th.

THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD THESE THINGS MET BEFORE THEN AND WE PAID THE PRICE.

WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER LOST THOSE 13 MARINES.

IN MY VIEW, H, IT WAS A SURRENDER TO THE TALIBAN AND WE JUST WORKED OUT THE SURRENDER.

WHAT WORRIES ME IN TERMS OF OUR WEAKNESS AROUND THE WORLD.

THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT HAD A CENSURE RESOLUTION THAT PASSED WITH THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

WE NEVER HAD THAT.

THE CRITICISM WITH THE GERMAN, FRENCH AND ENGLISH.

IT WASN'T JUST THE REPUBLICANS, IT WAS WORLDWIDE CRITICISM OF WHAT HAPPENED.

I WONDER WHAT TAIWAN THINKS.

WE HAVE PROTOCOLS IN PLACE TO PROTECT THEM.

WHAT DO THEY THINK NOW?

WHAT DOES UKRAINE THINK WHEN THEY HAVE RUSSIA BREATHING DOWN THEIR NECK.

I WORRY ABOUT OUR STANDING IN THE WORLD.

WE DO HAVE THE STRONGEST MILITARY AND THE STRONGEST DEMOCRACY, BUT I THINK WE LOOK WEAK AFTER WHAT HAPPENED IN AFGHANISTAN.

>> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, YOU SAID WE SHOULD HAVE HAD BAGRAM LONG TERM.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?

>> WE SHOULD HAVE HELD ON TO THAT AND IF CONDITIONS WEREN'T MET BY THE TALIBAN, THEY WEREN'T GOING TO GET THAT AIR BASE BACK.

MEANING THEY HAVE TO MEET CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF THEM TAKING BACK OVER.

IF THEY WEREN'T GOING TO DO IT, THEY WOULDN'T GET IT BACK.

>> IF THEY MET THOSE REQUIREMENTS, WE WOULD HAVE VACATED BAGRAM?

>> YEAH.

I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE SET THAT DEADLINE FOR LATER THIS YEAR AND HOLD THAT OVER THEIR HEAD.

WE HAVE NO LEVERAGE WITH THEM NOW.

>> WE, NOT JUST MILITARILY, WE PUT A LOT OF AID INTO AFGHANISTAN, HELPING TO CREATE DEMOCRATIC TYPE INSTITUTIONS, EDUCATION FOR WOMEN AS WELL AS YOUNG MEN, ET CETERA.

IS ALL OF THAT LOST?

>> YET TO BE DETERMINED, BUT I THINK IT IS.

I MEAN, LET'S NOT SUGAR COAT THIS.

THE TALIBAN IS A RUTHLESS TERRORIST ORGANIZATION THAT DOESN'T RESPECT WOMEN, DOESN'T RESPECT THE RIGHTS OF OTHER GROUPS IN AFGHANISTAN.

THEY ARE -- THEY CHOP OFF THE HEADS OF THEIR ENEMIES AND ADVERSARIES.

AND SO I DON'T THINK THEY CAN BE TRUSTED AT ALL.

AND SO, YEAH, I WORRY ABOUT ALL -- THINK ABOUT, WE SPENT $3 TRILLION OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.

WE LOST CLOSE TO 3,000 MEN AND WOMEN IN THE MILITARY THAT FOUGHT SO HARD OVER THERE.

IT DIDN'T HAVE TO BE THIS WAY.

SO, YES, OF COURSE, I WORRY ABOUT ALL THOSE EFFORTS AND THE HUMANITARIAN EFFORTS TO EDUCATE WOMEN.

MOST AFGHANS THAT WERE ALLIES HAVE NOW COME TO THE UNITED STATES.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT MONEY RIGHT NOW.

YOU GO BACK TO, AS WE TAPE THIS, YOU GO BACK NEXT MONDAY.

THERE ARE AN AWFUL LOT OF ISSUES FACING YOU SQUARE IN THE FACE, INCLUDING SEPTEMBER 30th IS THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

WILL THERE BE CONTINUING RESOLUTIONS, IN YOUR ESTIMATION, BECAUSE WE ARE NOT GOING TO SEE NEW RESOLUTIONS, BUT CONTINING RESOLUTIONS TO AT LEAST KEEP MONEY FLOWING FOR THE OPERATIONS OF THIS COUNTRY?

>> I HOPE SO.

REMEMBER, I'M A REPUBLICAN.

WE DON'T CONTROL THE HOUSE OR THE SENATE.

SO NANCY PELOSI IS IN CHARGE.

WE HAVE BEEN OFF FOR SEVEN WEEKS, THE LONGEST PERIOD OF TIME.

FRANKLY, I THINK WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN BACK IN WASHINGTON, D.C.

WORKING ON A NUMBER OF THESE ISSUES.

THAT HASN'T HAPPENED.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS.

WE NEED TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING.

WE ARE GOING TO RUN OUT OF MONEY.

WE HAVE AN INFRASTRUCTURE BILL, $3.5 TRILLION TAX RAISING MEASURE THE DEMOCRATS PUT IN PLACE THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS COMING TOGETHER IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS HERE.

LISTEN, WE SHOULD NOT DEFAULT ON OUR OBLIGATIONS THAT WE HAVE ON THE DEBT CEILING.

BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT IS DONE THE RIGHT WAY, THAT IT IS NOT TIED TO OTHER LEGISLATION.

WE'LL SEE HOW NANCY PELOSI HANDLES THAT.

WE CAN'T MESS AROUND WITH DEFAULTING ON OUR OBLIGATIONS >> WITH REGARD TO THE DEBT DREILING, TREASURE SECRETARY JANET YELLIN SAID THE FAILURE TO ACT ON THAT WOULD LIKELY CAUSE IRREPARABLE HARM TO THE U.S. ECONOMY.

SO WILL WE FIND A WAY TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING?

>> I HOPE SO.

I DON'T DISAGREE WITH HER STATEMENT THERE.

THERE IS IRREPARABLE HARM THAT WILL BE DONE IF WE DEFAULT.

DEMOCRATS CONTROL THE SENATE, THEY CONTROL THE HOUSE.

THEY CAN BRING THIS FORTH TO DO THAT.

I HOPE THEY DO THAT IN A WAY THAT IS NOT TIED TO OTHER LEGISLATION AND MAKE IT A PARTISAN EXERCISE, BUT, YEAH, THERE ARE GRAVE CONSEQUENCES IF WE DEFAULT ON OUR OBLIGATIONS, OUR DEBT OBLIGATIONS.

>> LET'S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, YOU MENTIONED MAKING SOME BILLS CONTINGENT UPON OTHER BILLS.

THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL.

THERE HAS BEEN SOME DISCUSSION THAT IN ORDER TO GET THE $3.5 TRILLION BUILD BACK BETTER BILL, TO GIVE IT SOME TRACTION, THAT THEY MAY TIE THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL TO THAT.

NOW THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL HAS PASSED THE SENATE AND NOW SITS IN YOUR CHAMBER.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL?

WHAT IS THE INSIDE INFORMATION IN TERMS OF WILL IT PASS ON ITS OWN?

>> WELL, H, I THINK YOU HAVE TO MAKE A DISTINCTION HERE.

WE HAVE WHAT WE CALL THE HARD INFRASTRUCTURE BILL, THE BIPARTISAN ONE YOU MENTIONED AND WHAT YOU CALL THE HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE.

THIS IS A NEW D.C.

TERM.

HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE, $3.5 TRILLION THAT IS BLATANTLY PARTISAN.

ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE BILL, THIS IS TRADITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE, ROADS, BRIDGES, LOCKS AND DAMS ON OUR MISSISSIPPI RIVER.

YOU CAN'T DRIVE FAR IN PEORIA WITHOUT WORRYING ABOUT BLOWING OUT A TIRE BECAUSE OF A POTHOLE.

IT PASSED IN THE SENATE WITH 19 REPUBLICANS SUPPORTING IT, INCLUDING SENATOR McCONNELL.

I GIVE THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION CREDIT, THEY NEGOTIATED THAT OVER A TWO-MONTH PERIOD.

IN GENERAL I THINK IT WILL BE GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY.

THE PROBLEM IS NANCY PELOSI TIED IT TO THE $3.5 TRILLION HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE BILL.

$3.5 TRILLION.

THEY WANT TO RAISE TAXES.

THERE AREN'T GOING TO BE ANY REPUBLICANS THAT SUPPORT THAT IF THEY GET TIED TOGETHER.

IF THIS HARD INFRASTRUCTURE BILL WAS BROUGHT UP FOR A VOTE IN THE HOUSE TOMORROW IT WOULD PASS OVERWHELMINGLY.

WE WOULD BE BUILDING INFRASTRUCTURE.

THEY HAVE BEEN PLAYING POLITICAL GAMES WITH TYING THE TWO TOGETHER.

>> WOULD YOU VOTE FOR THE HARD INFRASTRUCTURE BILL IF IT STOOD ALONE AS PASSED BY THE SENATE?

>> I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF MONEY THEY USED AS DEFICIT SPENDING.

$260 BILLION WILL BE SPENT IN DEFICIT SPENDING.

I GO BACK TO WHAT IT WILL DO FOR HARD INFRASTRUCTURE.

THAT IS GOOD FOR MY B DISTRICT AND I WOULD GIVE IT STRONG CONSIDERATION IN SUPPORTING IT.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT THE NATIONAL DEBT.

$260 BILLION OF THAT IS NOT FUNDED.

THE NATIONAL DEBT, AND LET ME CHECK THE NUMBERS, WE ARE LOOKING AT $28.5 TRILLION, UP $1.7 TRILLION IN THE PAST YEAR.

EVERY TIME YOU ARE ON "AT ISSUE" YOU TALK ABOUT THIS.

YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT YOUR CHILDREN.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

I MEAN, IT IS UNACCEPTABLE TO BE CLOSE TO $29 TRILLION IN DEBT.

I MEAN, GO BACK WHEN PRESIDENT OBAMA CAME IN IN 2008 THE NATIONAL DEBT WAS ABOUT $8 TRILLION OR $9 TRILLION.

WE ARE UP TO $28 TRILLION OR $29 TRILLION.

IT IS UNACCEPTABLE.

THE PROBLEM, H, IT IS NOT ON ANYBODY RADAR SCREEN.

YOU DO POLLING AND IT IS NOT IN THE TOP 10 LIST OF THINGS PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT IT.

IT IS AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT.

OUR MILITARY LEADERS SAY THAT IS THE BIGGEST THREAT TO OUR COUNTRY, OUR DEBT AND CONTINUING TO SPEND MONEY WE DON'T HAVE.

WE CAN'T CONTINUE TO GO DOWN THIS ROAD OR WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE MONEY TO FUNCTION.

IT HAS TO BE SOMETHING YOU ADDRESS.

YOU DO IT IN TWO WAYS, YOU HAVE TO HAVE STRONG ECONOMIC GROWTH, BRINGING IN TAX RECEIPTS, BUT YOU ALSO HAVE TO HAVE THE DISCIPLINE TO HOLD SPENDING UNDER CONTROL.

WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT.

WE HAVEN'T HAD AN APPETITE TO DO THAT.

LISTEN, I VOTED AGAINST ALMOST EVERY CONTINUING RESOLUTION, EVERY BUDGET BILL THAT SPENDS TOO MUCH MONEY.

I'M ONE VOTE OUT OF 435, BUT WE HAVE TO BE DISCIPLINED WHEN IT COMES TO SPENDING.

IT IS UNSUSTAINABLE.

>> YOU MENTION THE HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE BILL, BUILD BACK BETTER, IT'S GOT SEVERAL NAMES.

WHY HAS THE ADMINISTRATION, FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, PUT TOGETHER SO MANY DIFFERENT ASPECTS INTO ONE HUGE $3.5 TRILLION BILL?

BECAUSE WE HAVE FREE PRE-K, FREE COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATION, WE HAVE -- JUST GO DOWN THE LIST OF INFORMATION THAT IS IN THERE.

WOULD WE BE BETTER OFF IF WE TACKLED SOME OF THOSE ISSUES SEPARATELY?

WOULD YOU SUPPORT SOME OF WHAT IS IN THE HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE BILL?

>> WELL, LET ME MAKE A COUPLE OF POINTS.

YOU HIT ON THE TERM I THINK IS MOST RELEVANT.

FREE.

ALL THESE THINGS THEY WANT TO MAKE FREE.

FREE CHILDCARE, FREE TUITION AT THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE LEVEL, FREE HOUSING, FREE BENEFITS.

WE SHOULD DEBATE THESE SEPARATELY, BUT THEY LUMPED IT TOGETHER.

IT IS A SORT OF CHRISTMAS LIST OF DEMOCRATIC IDEALS.

THEY WANT TO RAM THIS THROUGH.

IN ADDITION THEY WANT TO PAY FOR IT BY RAISING TAXES, SMALL BUSINESSES AND WORKING FAMILIES, WITH ESTATE TAX AND STEPPED UP BASIS, WHICH WOULD AFFECT EVERY FAMILY FARM, EVERY FAMILY BUSINESS.

I'M AGAINST IT FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.

ONE IS I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE GIVING AWAY ALL THOSE FREE THINGS.

WE ARE COMING OUT OF A PANDEMIC, THE LAST THING WE OUGHT TO BE DOING COMING OUT OF A PANDEMIC IS RAISE TAXES.

THEY ARE DOING IT THROUGH BUDGET RECONCILIATION.

THERE IS NO BIPARTISAN.

THE LAST POINT I WILL MAKE, H. I TRAVEL IN MY DISTRICT, SO MANY UNFILLED JOBS.

10.3 MILLION JOBS UNFILLED.

WE CAN'T FIND TRUCK DRIVERS, WELDERS, NURSES, LANDSCAPERS, PEOPLE IN RESTAURANTS AND STORES BECAUSE WE HAVE GIVEN AWAY SO MUCH MONEY THROUGH UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS, THROUGH STIMULUS CHECKS.

LISTEN, THERE WAS A TIME AND PLACE TO HELP PEOPLE THROUGH THE PANDEMIC, BUT I THINK THAT TIME IS PASSED.

I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD GO DOWN THIS HUMAN INFRASTRUCTURE, SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE BILL.

WE OUGHT TO GET THE ECONOMY BACK TO WHERE IT WAS PRE-COVID WHICH WAS THE BEST IN MY LIFE TIME.

>> FOR CLARIFICATION, YOU MENTIONED TAX ON WORKING FAMILIES.

THE ADMINISTRATION HAS SAID NO FAMILY MAKING LESS THAN $400,000 WILL SEE AN INCREASE IN TAXES.

SO COULD YOU HELP ME UNDERSTAND TAX ON WORKING FAMILIES.

>> SURE.

>> IF IT IS LESS THAN $400,000, THAT WOULD BE A WORKING FAMILY, I WOULD THINK.

>> I SERVE ON THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE SO WE MARKED UP THIS BILL IN THE LAST FOUR DAYS.

WE TALKED EXTENSIVELY.

I WILL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE, FAMILY FARMS, CHANGING STEPPED UP BASIS, THE TAX THEY WILL PAY PASSING DOWN THAT FAMILY BUSINESS.

IF YOU OWN A PLUMBING COMPANY OR LANDSCAPING COMPANY OR A RESTAURANT AND PASS THAT DOWN, YOU PAY AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT WHEN YOU DO THAT.

RIGHT NOW THE BUSINESS TAX RATE.

IF YOU ARE A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER AND YOU, DEPENDENT ON HOW YOU ARE STRUCTURED, WE LOWERED THAT TO 21%.

THEY WILL RAISE IT UP TO 26%.

THAT IS GOING TO AFFECT MANY, MANY FAMILIES IN TERMS OF PAYING THAT HIGHER RATE.

IT DOESN'T AFFECT EVERYBODY, BUT IT IS CLEARLY GOING TO AFFECT A LARGE PORTION OF SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS, WHICH MANY OF THOSE ARE MIDDLE CLASS FOLKS.

>> I WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT SOME OF THE BILLS THAT YOU HAVE VOTED ON IN THE PAST.

THE JOHN LEWIS VOTING RIGHTS ADVANCEMENT ACT, AN AMENDMENT TO THE 1965 VOTING RIGHTS ACT.

YOU VOTED AGAINST IT.

IT PASSED THE HOUSE, BUT WHY DID YOU VOTE AGAINST IT?

>> FIRST OF ALL, IT WAS A VERY PARTISAN VOTE.

I DON'T KNOW THERE ARE ANY REPUBLICANS THAT SUPPORTED IT.

>> IT WAS 219-212.

>> 219 DEMOCRATS AND 212 REPUBLICANS.

A VERY PARTISAN BILL.

FIRST OF ALL, WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO HAVE ELECTION REFORM.

THE FOUNDATION OF OUR DEMOCRACY IS THE INTEGRITY OF OUR ELECTION SYSTEM.

WE SAW THIS LAST ELECTION THAT THERE WERE IMPROPRIETIES IN AT LEAST SEVEN DIFFERENT STATES.

BUT WHAT I HAVE SAID, I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF FEDERALIZING OUR NATIONAL ELECTION SYSTEM.

STATES OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO DECIDE HOW THEY RUN ELECTIONS.

WYOMING SHOULD BE ABLE TO DECIDE HOW THEY RUN ELECTION.

ILLINOIS SHOULD DECIDE HOW WE REPUBLICAN OUR ELECTION.

THIS BILL I VOTED AGAINST FEDERALIZES HOW WE DO ELECTIONS.

NOW, I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF WORKING WITHIN THE STATE AND ILLINOIS HAS DONE A FAIRLY GOOD JOB.

I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF ALL THE THINGS.

HAVE DONE A FAIRLY GOOD JOB MAKING SURE THE ELECTION SYSTEM RUNS WELL.

WE INVESTED IN THE EQUIPMENT.

FLORIDA IS A GOOD EXAMPLE.

IT HAS DONE THE SAME THING.

NEW YORK HAS DONE IT.

THERE ARE EXAMPLES OF STATES.

ARE THERE AREAS WE CAN DO BETTER?

ABSOLUTELY.

THE STATE OF GEORGIA THROUGH THEIR STATE LEGISLATURE PASSED A LAW THAT CHANGED A NUMBER OF THINGS.

MANY STATES ARE DOING THAT NOW.

I THINK IT IS BETTER TO LEAVE IT UP TO THE STATES.

I DON'T WANT TO BE IN THE SAME SYSTEM AS CALIFORNIA IN ILLINOIS WHERE YOU CAN HARVEST BALLOTS.

THE SFWEGTY OF THE ELECTION SYSTEM, MAKING SURE THERE ARE MEASURES THAT I CAN STRONGLY SUPPORT.

>> YOU VOTED NO TO INVESTIGATE JANUARY 6.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN YOUR VOTE?

>> SURE.

H, IN A PREVIOUS LIFE I WAS A STATE AND FEDERAL PROSECUTOR.

I HAVE SPOKEN OUT ABOUT JANUARY 6 AND HOW IT WAS AN EMBARRASSMENT TO OUR DEMOCRACY AND EVERY PERSON INVOLVED SHOULD BE PROSECUTED TO THE FULL EXTENT OF THE LAW.

THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND F.B.I.

HAS A FULL INVESTIGATION GOING ON.

WE ARE UP TO 400 OR 450 PEOPLE HAVE BEEN INDICTED, CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED, BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THAT TRAGIC DAY.

I FOLLOWED THAT INVESTIGATION AND THOSE PROSECUTIONS VERY, VERY CLOSELY.

I'M SATISFIED THAT INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION IS GOING TO WELL.

SEPARATELY, THE HOUSE OF ADMINISTRATION IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HAS A BIPARTISAN COMMITTEE THAT IS OVERLOOKING WHAT HAPPENED ON JANUARY 6, SEPARATELY FROM THAT, THE SENATE, SENATE RULES COMMITTEE HAS AN ONGOING INVESTIGATION GOING ON THERE.

I WAS SATISFIED WITH THOSE THREE THAT THE PROPER OVERSIGHT, THE PROPER INVESTIGATION AND MAKING SURE PEOPLE WERE HELD ACCOUNTABLE IS BEING DONE.

WHAT I SAID AT THE TIME WHEN I VOTED AGAINST THE JANUARY 6 COMMISSION IS IF I'M NOT SATISFIED THAT THOSE THREE ENTITIES ARE DOING THE RIGHT THING OR GETTING TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS, I'M OPEN MINDED AT LOOKING AT A COMMISSION.

>> THERE ARE ABOUT 700,000 RESIDENTS OF D.C., DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

THERE IS A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FOR THEM, BUT THAT REPRESENTATIVE DOES NOT HAVE A VOTING RIGHT.

>> MM-HMM.

>> THERE WAS A BILL TO CREATE STATEHOOD OTHER THAN THE FEDERAL PROPERTIES FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

YOU VOTED AGAINST THAT BILL.

WHY WOULD YOU DO THAT WHEN THERE ARE 700,000 CITIZENS WHO DON'T HAVE A VOTING REPRESENTATIVE?

>> SURE.

WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY OVER 240 YEARS AND YOU LOOK AT OUR FOUNDING FATHERS, AND WHAT THEY PUT TOGETHER, THEY NEVER ENVISIONED D.C.

BEING A STATE.

IF THEY THOUGHT D.C. WAS GOING TO BE A STATE THEY WOULD HAVE PUT IT IN THE CONSTITUTION OR FOUNDING PAPERS THAT LAID OUT HOW THE STATE'S SYSTEM WAS GOING TO BE PUT TOGETHER.

IT WAS NEVER IN THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.

IN MY VIEW WHEN YOU READ THE WRITINGS AROUND THE CONSTITUTION, THERE IS NOTHING THAT INDICATED THEY WANTED D.C. TO BE A STATE.

THAT IS FIRST AND FOREMOST.

SECONDLY, I ALSO WORRY A LITTLE BIT THAT THIS IS DEMOCRATS PLAYING POLITICS.

THEY KNOW IF THEY ARE ABLE TO MAKE D.C. A STATE THEY GET TWO NEW DEMOCRAT SENATORS BECAUSE D.C. IS OVERWHELMINGLY DEMOCRAT.

SO THEY MAKE IT A STATE, THEY GET TWO NEW DEMOCRAT SENATORS AND FOR THOSE REASONS I VOTED AGAINST IT.

>> BUT YOU VOTED YES TO RETURN THE NON-FEDERAL PORTIONS OF D.C. TO THE STATE OF MARYLAND AND THAT PROPERTY ACTUALLY HAD BEEN IN MARYLAND 200 YEARS AGO.

>> CORRECT.

LISTEN, I THOUGHT THAT WAS A FAIR COMPROMISE IS IF THE CITIZENS OF WASHINGTON, D.C. WANT TO HAVE PROPER REPRESENTATION, I'M OPEN MINDED ON GIVING THAT PORTION TO MARYLAND EXCEPT FOR THE MALL AND WHERE SOME OF THE CAPITOL AND THE WHITE HOUSE ARE AT.

THAT BILL EXCLUDED THOSE, BUT I WAS IN FAVOR OF DOING THAT.

I THOUGHT IT WAS AN APPROPRIATE COMPROMISE.

>> A FINAL THOUGHT, THE CENTER FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES SAID THEY MADE A CLERICAL ERROR OVER THE PAST DECADE, I BELIEVE IT WAS, THAT HARMS CERTAIN COLLEGES OF NURSING, INCLUDING OSF HERE IN PEORIA, AND OTHERS.

YOU ARE SPEARHEADING AN EFFORT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CMNS DOES NOT ASK FOR THAT MONEY BACK.

WE ARE TALKING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

>> YEAH.

>> WHERE IS THE STATUS OF THAT BILL?

>> SO, I INTRODUCED THIS LEGISLATION, H, ALONG WITH A DEMOCRAT FROM DELAWARE, CONGRESSWOMAN ROCHESTER.

I'M PROUD TO REPRESENT FOUR NURSING SCHOOLS IN MY DISTRICT.

I HAVE BEEN VERY VOCAL ON THIS.

CMS, A FEDERAL AGENCY UNDER HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, HAS -- THEY MADE A CLERICAL MISTAKE A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO.

THEY HAVE JUST FOUND THAT CLERICAL MISTAKE AND NOW TRYING TO CLAW BACK MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FROM THESE NURSING SCHOOLS.

WHEN YOU TALK TO THE FOLKS AT THE NURSING SCHOOLS IN PEER YO, METHODIST OR OSF, FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE SUCH A NURSING SHORTAGE RIGHT NOW.

THIS IS MONEY WELL SPENT, THEY SPENT IT IN THE EXACT WAY THEY WERE TOLD TO DO THAT AND NOW THEY WANT TO CLAW BACK AND TAKE BACK THAT MONEY.

IT WOULD HAVE A DETRIMENTAL EFFECT ON THESE NURSING SCHOOLS.

WE ARE WORKING IN A BIPARTISAN WAY.

WE HAVE A NUMBER OF DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN CO-SPONSORS AND HOPE TO GET IT ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.

>> WITH THAT, WE HAVE SO MUCH MORE TO TALK ABOUT.

WE WILL INVITE YOU BACK AGAIN WHEN YOU ARE IN THE DISTRICT.

THANK YOU TO REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN DARIN LAHOOD.

>> THANK YOU, H. >> WE WERE DISCUSSING THE ISSUE OF AFGHANISTAN, WE WILL DISCUSS IT NEXT WEEK ON "AT ISSUE".

WE HAVE TWO FORMER AMBASSADORS IN THE MIDDLE EAST, ONE WHO REPRESENTED THE U.S.

IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.

THOSE TWO AMBASSADORS WILL BE ON THE NEXT "AT ISSUE".