REPORT FROM SANTA FE IS MADE POSSIBLE, IN PART, BY GRANTS FROM THE NEW MEXICO MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, A BETTER NEW MEXICO THROUGH BETTER CITIES AND FROM >>LORENE: HELLO, I AM LORENE MILLS AND WELCOME TO REPORT FROM SANTA FE .

ONE OF MY FAVORITE NEW MEXICO POLITICIANS IN MY YEARS OF DOING NEW MEXICO POLITICS IS OUR GUEST TODAY, SENATOR JEFF BINGAMAN.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

>>JEFF: THANK YOU FOR INVITING ME, THANK YOU.

>>LORENE: WELL YOU FOR 30 YEARS FROM 1983 TO 2013, YOU SERVED IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE REPRESENTING US SO WELL.

YOU HAD FIVE TERMS AND WERE YOU NINTH IN SENIORITY?

>>JEFF: I AM NOT SURE WHAT NUMBER I WAS.

>>LORENE: WELL, YOU WERE UP THERE.

>>JEFF: I KNOW I WAS FIFTH OR SIXTH MAYBE.

>>LORENE: YEAH, YEAH.

I JUST COULDN'T... >>JEFF: SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BY THE TIME I QUIT.

>>LORENE: RIGHT, I COULDN'T DO THE MATH.

SO THANK YOU.

>>JEFF: I AM NOT SURE EITHER.

>>LORENE: BUT ONE OF YOUR AMAZING AND CRUCIAL JOBS WAS AS CHAIR OF THE ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE AND YOU DID SO MUCH FOR OUR STATE AND FOR THE COUNTRY IN THAT ROLE.

YOU ALSO WERE ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, AND YOU WERE ON THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ECONOMY.

BUT YOU STARTED OUT, WELL, YEARS AGO YOU WERE OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL FROM 1979 TO 1983.

YOU WENT TO STANFORD LAW SCHOOL, YOU ARE AN EXPERT ON ENERGY, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU ABOUT THAT A LITTLE LATER ON WHAT IS GOING ON WITH ENERGY.

YOU WENT FROM BEING AN EAGLE SCOUT AT AGE 15 TO A BA FROM HARVARD IN GOVERNMENT AND STANFORD LAW SCHOOL AND YOUR FIRST CAMPAIGN WAS IN 1982.

TALK TO ME ABOUT WHO YOU RAN AGAINST AND WHAT YOUR POWERFUL AD CAMPAIGN WAS.

>>JEFF: WELL, REALLY MY FIRST CAMPAIGN WAS 78 WHEN I RAN FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL.

>>LORENE: RIGHT, RIGHT.

>>JEFF: MY FIRST CAMPAIGN FOR THE SENATE WAS 82 AND, OF COURSE, THE INCUMBENT THEN WAS HARRISON JACK SCHMIDT WHO WAS THE REPUBLICAN SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO.

WE WERE SUCCESSFUL IN THAT CAMPAIGN AND THEN AS YOU POINT OUT, I STAYED THERE IN THE SENATE FOR FIVE TERMS.

>>LORENE: YES, MUCH TO THE BENEFIT OF NEW MEXICO.

AND YOU WERE ALSO ONE OF THE FEW VOTES IN THE SENATE AGAINST THE IRAQ WAR, I AM VERY PROUD OF YOU FOR THAT.

>>JEFF: YEAH, THERE WERE 23 OF US IN THE SENATE WHO VOTED AGAINST AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT TO INVADE IRAQ AND I AM GLAD THAT I WAS ONE OF THE 23 EVEN THOUGH WE DIDN'T PREVAIL.

IT WAS THE RIGHT DECISION.

>>LORENE: IT THE RIGHT THING.

YEAH, AND ALSO ANOTHER RIGHT THING THAT BENEFITED AMERICA SO MUCH WAS YOUR VOTE AND SUPPORT FOR THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.

>>JEFF: YEAH AND AGAIN I THOUGHT THAT WAS AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

IT'S BENEFITED US TREMENDOUSLY HERE IN NEW MEXICO.

WE DRAMATICALLY INCREASED THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE COVERED BY MEDICAID AS PART OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, AND WE HAVE ALSO MANAGED TO INSURE QUITE A FEW PEOPLE AS WELL.

>>LORENE: THAT WOULD HAVE HAD NO HEALTHCARE OTHERWISE.

>>JEFF: RIGHT, WE HAD A VERY HIGH PERCENTAGE OF OUR POPULATION WITH NO HEALTHCARE COVERAGE.

>>LORENE: AND IN A VERY POOR STATE ANYWAY.

>>JEFF: YEAH.

>>LORENE: THEY WERE LIKE THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL.

>>JEFF: YEAH.

>>LORENE: THEY COULDN'T AFFORD HEALTHCARE, THEY COULDN'T GET INSURED AND YOU HELPED GET THAT FOR THEM.

>>JEFF: YEAH AND WE STILL HAVE GOT BIG PROBLEMS IN OUR HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, BUT THEY ARE LESS ONEROUS NOW ON PEOPLE THAN THEY WERE BACK BEFORE THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.

>>LORENE: WELL, I HAVE ASKED YOU BACK TO TALK ABOUT YOUR BOOK, BREAK DOWN LESSON FOR A CONGRESS IN CRISIS .

I WISH THAT THE CONGRESS WAS NO LONGER IN CRISIS BUT SESSION AFTER SESSION, YOUR BOOK BECOMES SO IMPORTANT, I WISH EVERYONE WOULD READ IT.

I LOVE THE AMBIGUITY OF THE "BREAKDOWN" BECAUSE CONGRESS IS DEFINITELY BREAKING DOWN RIGHT NOW IN THE HEADLINES, WE ARE FACING ANOTHER SHUTDOWN.

BUT ALSO YOU GIVE A BREAKDOWN OF CAUSE AND EFFECT, PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS AND THAT IS WHY YOUR BOOK IS SO IMPORTANT FOR ME.

THANK YOU.

>>JEFF: WELL, THANK YOU.

>>LORENE: SO WHAT YOU HAVE TAKEN OF THIS IS THAT YOU HAVE GOT A STATEMAN'S POINT OF VIEW.

YOU HAVE SERVED FOR 30 YEARS, YOU HAVE SEEN IT IN SUNSHINE AND SHADOW AND YOU KNOW THE GOOD TIMES AND THE BAD TIMES.

AND SO YOU ARE ABLE TO REALLY PINPOINT WHAT THE DYSFUNCTIONS ARE AND THEN YOU HAVE WONDERFUL SOLUTIONS YOU TALK ABOUT, I WILL LET YOU EXPAND ON THIS BUT YOU SAY, "BEWARE OF THE FIVE IMPEDIMENTS," AND THEY SAY, WAIT BUT THERE ARE WORTHY OPTIONS, THERE ARE THINGS WE CAN DO TO FIX IT.

SO TALK ABOUT THE DYSFUNCTION IN CONGRESS AND THE DISINTEGRATION OF CONGRESSIONAL GOVERNING NORMS AND WHAT'S WRONG AND HOW TO FIX IT.

WELL, I DON'T HAVE TO SAY ANOTHER WORD.

>>JEFF: WELL, WHAT I TRY TO DO IS TO POINT OUT SOME OF THE MAJOR EXAMPLES OF HOW THE FUNCTIONING OF CONGRESS, IN MY VIEW, BROKE DOWN DURING THE TIME I WAS THERE, DURING THE 30 YEARS.

THE FIRST 12 YEARS THAT I WAS IN CONGRESS FROM 83 TO 95, I THINK THERE WAS A GENERAL CONSENSUS THAT CONGRESS WAS GOING TO KEEP THE GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONING, WE WEREN'T GOING TO SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT.

I MEAN OBVIOUSLY WE HAD BIG DISAGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES AND BETWEEN THE CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT BUT EVERYBODY SORT OF SHARED A RESPONSIBILITY TO KEEP THINGS MOVING AHEAD AS WE CONTINUED TO ARGUE AND NEGOTIATE.

BUT THAT CHANGED, IN MY VIEW, THAT CHANGED IN 95.

>>LORENE: AND WHAT CAUSED IT TO CHANGE?

>>JEFF: WELL, I THINK IT WAS THE ELECTION OF NEWT GINGRICH AS SPEAKER.

I THINK HE WAS VERY EXPLICIT ABOUT HOW HE THOUGHT THAT ONE OF HIS OPTIONS, ONE OF THE OPTIONS THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES HAD IN ORDER TO PUT PRESSURE ON PRESIDENT CLINTON AT THAT TIME TO GET HIM TO AGREE TO A BUNCH OF SPENDING CHANGES.

WELL ONE OF THE WAYS THAT THEY COULD DO THAT WAS TO SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT AND THEN THAT WOULD GET CLINTON TO BUCKLE UNDER AND ACCEDE TO THEIR DEMANDS.

WELL, IT DIDN'T WORK, I MEAN THEY SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT A COUPLE OF TIMES, GINGRICH DID, BUT CLINTON DIDN'T ACCEDE TO THEIR DEMANDS AND SO THEY GAVE IT UP AFTER A WHILE.

BUT WHAT THAT DID, IN MY OPINION, WAS TO SORT OF START THE PROCESS OF SHUTTING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT AS A WAY TO TRY TO WIN IN THESE NEGOTIATIONS AND IT HAPPENED THEN, THAT WAS 95 AND 96, A COUPLE OF BACK TO BACK SHUTDOWNS THEN.

THE NEXT BIG SHUTDOWN WAS IN 2013 WHEN OBAMA WAS PRESIDENT, THEN AGAIN IT WAS THE HOUSE AND THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS DECIDED THAT THEY WERE GOING TO, THIS WAS A CRAZY THING BECAUSE WE HAD PASSED THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT THREE YEARS BEFORE IN 2010, IT HAD BEEN IN EFFECT FOR THREE YEARS, BUT THEY DECIDED THAT THEY COULD GET THE PRESIDENT AND THE ADMINISTRATION TO SUSPEND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT IF THEY JUST WERE TO SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT UNTIL THE PRESIDENT AGREED.

WELL, AGAIN, THEY DIDN'T WORK, THERE IS NO WAY THAT OBAMA WAS GOING TO AGREE TO THAT.

AND SO THAT DIDN'T WORK AND THEN THE OTHER CRAZY THING IS THAT IN 2018, WE GOT TRUMP AS PRESIDENT AND HE DECIDES THAT IF THE CONGRESS CAN SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, WHY CAN'T HE SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT AND SO HE SHUT THE GOVERNMENT FOR 34 DAYS I BELIEVE IT WAS.

IT WAS THE LONGEST SHUTDOWN THAT WE HAVE EXPERIENCED AS A WAY AT LEAST THE WAY THAT HE EXPLAINED IT WAS HE WOULD NOT SIGN APPROPRIATIONS BILLS TO KEEP GOVERNMENT FUNDED UNLESS CONGRESS WERE TO AUTHORIZE AND APPROPRIATE THE MONEY TO BUILD A WALL ALONG THE BORDER.

WELL, CONGRESS DIDN'T AGREE TO THAT.

>>LORENE: MEXICO IS GOING TO BUILD A WALL AND PAY FOR IT.

>>JEFF: RIGHT AND HE SAID MEXICO WAS TO BUILD IT.

>>LORENE: HE DIDN'T HAVE TO.

>>JEFF: HE SAID THAT EARLIER.

SO AT ANY RATE, THOSE WERE THREE EXAMPLES WHERE THIS SHUTTING DOWN OF THE GOVERNMENT HAS BEEN A TACTIC THAT REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN USING WHEN WE HAVE A DEMOCRAT IN THE WHITEHOUSE AND THEN, OF COURSE, AS I SAY THE LAST TIME IT WAS TRUMP USING IT IN ORDER TO PUT PRESSURE ON DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS AND YOU HAD SHUMER AND PELOSI, THEY WEREN'T GOING TO AGREE TO THAT AND THEY DIDN'T AGREE TO IT.

SO ANY RATE, WE NOW HAVE IT AGAIN IN SPADES I THINK, WE ARE HEADED TOWARDS A SHUTDOWN AGAIN THIS WEEKEND.

AND AGAIN, IT IS A CRAZY STRATEGY QUITE FRANKLY TO THINK THAT YOU ARE GOING TO FORCE THE OTHER SIDE TO CHANGE THEIR POSITION BY SHUTTING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT.

IT JUST DOESN'T WORK.

>>LORENE: BUT ALSO, LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE GOVERNMENT IS SHUT DOWN.

SO IT AFFECTS A LOT OF PEOPLE - AID TO CHILDREN, FOOD STAMPS, UNEMPLOYMENT, VA STUFF.

I MEAN IT IS A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE AFFECTED, AND IT STOPS, THEY NO LONGER GET THEIR NORMAL MONEY.

PEOPLE GO HUNGRY, PEOPLE LOSE THEIR HOMES, I MEAN IT IS VERY SERIOUS STUFF.

IT SHOULDN'T BE A PAWN, IT SHOULDN'T BE A PLOY.

>>JEFF: NO, I AGREE.

THE THING THAT FINALLY PERSUADED TRUMP, PRESIDENT TRUMP, TO GIVE UP ON HIS SHUTDOWN WAS THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS.

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL ANNOUNCED THAT THEY HAD TOO MANY AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS CALLING IN SICK AND THEREFORE THE AIRPLANES LEAVING LAGUARDIA WERE GOING TO BE A HOUR AND A HALF TO TWO HOURS LATE AND EVERYONE SHOULD EXPECT THAT.

AND I THINK THAT SORT OF RANG THE ALARM BELL FOR PEOPLE TO THINK, OKAY WE HAVE GOT TO SOBER UP HERE AND GET THINGS BACK ON TRACK, WE CAN'T JUST SHUT DOWN ALL THE AIR TRAFFIC IN THE COUNTRY.

>>LORENE: AND NO ONLY LATE PLANES BUT DANGER.

>>JEFF: OH YEAH.

>>LORENE: TWO PLANES, IT WAS VERY SERIOUS.

>>JEFF: RIGHT.

>>LORENE: THEY HAD TO JUST STOP AND WAIT A MINUTE, THIS IS NOT A GAME, PEOPLE'S LIVES ARE AT STAKE.

>>JEFF: YEAH.

SO AT ANY RATE, IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE HEADED THERE AGAIN AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS WILL HAVE TO, HAVE TO SAVE US.

BUT SOME WAY OR OTHER, ASSUMING THAT WE DO HAVE A SHUT DOWN, SOME WAY OR OTHER IT IS GOING TO COME TO A CLOSE AND THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE INSTIGATED THE SHUTDOWN ARE GOING TO PAY A POLITICAL PRICE, I BELIEVE.

>>LORENE: WELL I THINK THEY SHOULD.

AGAIN, IT SHOULD BE OFF THE TABLE, THIS IS NOT THE WAY GROWNUPS HANDLE... >>JEFF: YEAH, NO I AGREE.

>>LORENE: BECAUSE I KNOW IN THIS TOXIC PARTISAN ENVIRONMENT, TWO SIDES, YOU KNOW WE NEED THOSE GREAT LEADERS TO BRING THE TWO SIDES TOGETHER AND TO WORK FOR THE GOOD OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, NOT FOR PARTY OVER PATRIOTISM.

IT IS A LITTLE TOUGH BUT.

YOU HAVE MENTIONED THERE WERE FIVE IMPEDIMENTS TO, WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER THE FIVE IMPEDIMENTS TO OVERCOMING THIS KIND OF BREAKDOWN AND CHECK OUT BY THE WAY I JUST NEED THAT WE ARE HALFWAY THROUGH AND SAY WE ARE SPEAKING TODAY WITH SENATOR JEFF BINGAMAN ABOUT THIS BOOK, BREAK DOWN ABOUT THESE SHUTDOWNS IN THE GOVERNMENT .

SO WHAT ARE THE FIVE IMPEDIMENTS, HOW DO WE STOP SHUTDOWNS?

>>JEFF: WELL, THE WAY TO STOP SHUTDOWNS IS JUST TO GET CONGRESS TO SOBER UP AND FLY RIGHT.

BUT THERE ARE IMPEDIMENTS WHICH I TRY TO POINT OUT THAT I THINK IMPEDE THE ABILITY OF INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO DO WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

AND SOME OF THOSE, I MEAN, THERE ARE THINGS THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTAND, THERE IS IDEOLOGY FOR EXAMPLE.

PEOPLE COME TO CONGRESS WITH SUCH A STRONG IDEOLOGICAL POINT OF VIEW THAT THEY CAN'T SORT OF DO THE PRACTICAL THING WHICH HAS TO BE DONE AND I THINK THE MAIN EXAMPLE I CITE IN THERE IS THE 2008 FINANCIAL CRISIS THAT THE COUNTRY WAS IN WHERE WE BASICALLY NEEDED TO STEP IN AND PROVIDE FINANCING FOR THE MAJOR BANKS.

AND YOU HAD A BUNCH OF PEOPLE SAYING, NO, NO, I AM NOT GOING TO DO THAT, THE BANKS ARE THE PROBLEM, I AM NOT GOING TO... AND THE BANKS WERE THE PROBLEM.

I MEAN THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE GOVERNMENT DIDN'T HAVE TO STEP IN AND BAIL THEM OUT TO AN EXTENT.

SO THAT IS AN EXAMPLE.

SPECIAL INTEREST IS AN EXAMPLE OF AN IMPEDIMENT.

THERE I THINK THE MAIN EXAMPLE I TALK ABOUT IS CLIMATE CHANGE, I MEAN I BELIEVE THAT THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY HAS BEEN VERY EFFECTIVE IN PLAYING THE LONG GAME OF PREVENTING BOLD MEASURES BY CONGRESS TO DEAL WITH CLIMATE CHANGE.

AND THE TRUTH IS THEY PERSUADED AN AWFUL LOT, PARTICULARLY IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, TO SUPPORT THEIR POINT OF VIEW, TO QUESTION THE SCIENCE.

AND SO WE ARE SORT OF BEHIND THE EIGHT BALL ON THAT.

OF COURSE, PRESIDENT TRUMP WHEN HE GOT INTO OFFICE, HE TOOK US OUT OF THE PARIS ACCORDS THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA HAD HELPED DEVELOP AND SO THERE WAS A MAJOR SET BACK THERE, SO THAT IS ANOTHER IMPEDIMENT.

ANOTHER MAJOR ONE WHICH WE HAVE SEEN A LOT OF EXAMPLES OF RECENTLY IS THE MEDIA AND THIS BUSINESS OF FOX NEWS HAVING TO PAY $800 MILLION DOLLARS BECAUSE THEIR SO-CALLED NEWSCASTERS, I MEAN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THEIR PROGRAMS ARE JUST MOUTHING THESE UNTRUTHS.

>>LORENE: RIGHT, THAT BIDEN DIDN'T REALLY WIN, THAT THE ELECTION WAS STOLEN.

>>JEFF: RIGHT.

>>LORENE: AND NOW, YOU KNOW, FORTUNSATELY, DOMINION SUED THEM, THE VOTING MACHINE.

NOBODY HACKED OUR VOTING MACHINES, YOU CAN'T BE SAYING THAT.

YOU KNOW AND SO THEY ARE HAVING TO TAKE A SECOND LOOK.

THEY ALSO HAVE A LOT OF PRESSURE TO VOTE AS THE POLLS SAY SO THIS THING IS POPULAR.

>>JEFF: RIGHT.

>>LORENE: SO THEY ARE GOING TO GO FROM THEIR OWN IDEOLOGY AND THEIR OWN IDEAS TO DOING WHAT WILL GARNER THEM POSITIVE REVIEWS IN THE POLLS.

>>JEFF: WELL, YEAH.

THEY BASICALLY HAVE A BUSINESS MODEL WHICH SAYS YOU KNOW YOU HAVE GOT TO KEEP YOUR AUDIENCE, YOU HAVE DEVELOPED THIS RIGHT-WING AUDIENCE AND NURTURED THEM ALONG AND NOW IF YOU DON'T CONTINUE TO TELL THEM WHAT THEY WANT TO HEAR, THEY ARE GOING TO SWITCH OVER TO SOME OTHER CHANNEL.

>>LORENE: YEAH.

>>JEFF: AND THEN YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE YOUR AUDIENCE AND IF YOU LOSE YOUR AUDIENCE, THEN YOUR RATINGS GO DOWN AND PEOPLE QUIT ADVERTISING.

SO THE WHOLE THING IS VERY UNFORTUNATE.

>>LORENE: YES AND WE ALL OBSERVE IT IN EVERYDAY LIFE.

YOU KNOW AND SO WHEN I TALK TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE A STRONG IDEOLOGY, I SAY, "WELL, WHAT DO YOU USE FOR NEWS, DO YOU DO REUTERS, BBC, THE GUARDIAN TO GIVE AN EXTERNAL POINT BESIDES THIS INTERNAL PARTISAN OUTLETS."

BUT YOU HAVE MENTIONED ALSO THAT THE WORTHY EFFORTS TO GET THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS DONE AND THEY ARE A WONDERFUL THINGS, BUT WE HAVE TO WORK ON HAVING A STRONG ECONOMY, CONTROL DEBT, WE HAVE TO LEAD IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, MEET THE CLIMATE CHANGE'S CHALLENGES, HEALTHCARE, EDUCATION AND ALL THOSE GOOD THINGS AND TO STAY AWAY FROM THE PRESSURE TO LOOK GOOD IN THE POLLS AND TO GO AHEAD AND DO WHAT WE KNOW IS RIGHT FOR THE COUNTRY.

>>JEFF: YEAH AND UNFORTUNATELY THOSE ISSUES THAT I CITE THERE WHERE WE MADE MAJOR I THOUGHT WORTHY EFFORTS.

THEY ALWAYS GET PUSHED TO THE BACK BURNER WHILE WE ARE BUSY ARGUING ABOUT SHUTTING DOWN THE GOVERNMENT OR SOME OTHER THING.

I MEAN IT IS A MAJOR DISTRACTION FROM WORKING ON THE REAL PROBLEMS THAT THE COUNTRY FACES.

>>LORENE: SENATOR BINGAMAN ONE OF THE THINGS I LOVED ABOUT YOUR BOOK WAS YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONGRESSIONAL IMPROVEMENT, TALK ABOUT THE REFORM OF THE FILIBUSTER AND OTHER THINGS, TELL US SOME OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS I WISH THAT EVERY LAWMAKER COULD READ THIS.

>>JEFF: I WISH SO, TOO.

WELL, FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE CURRENT CRISIS, WHICH IS THE SHUTTING DOWN OF THE GOVERNMENT, THERE ARE SEVERAL BILLS PENDING IN THE SENATE, AND I THINK PROBABLY IN THE HOUSE AS WELL, THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY SAY THAT WHEN AN APPROPRIATION BILL RUNS OUT, WHICH IT IS GOING TO AT THE END OF SEPTEMBER - MIDNIGHT ON SATURDAY NIGHT.

THEN THE GOVERNMENT CONTINUES TO BE FUNDED AT A LESSER RATE AND IT MIGHT BE 95 PERCENT, IT MIGHT 98 PERCENT AND YOU CAN CUSTOMIZE THAT BY SAYING, "EVERY PART OF THE GOVERNMENT EXCEPT THE CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT, THE WHITEHOUSE, SHALL CONTINUE TO BE FUNDED AT THIS 95 PERCENT LEVEL."

AND THAT WOULD ALLOW PRESSURE TO EXIST ON THE CONGRESS TO GO AHEAD AND GET TOGETHER AND FIND OUT WHAT AN ULTIMATE SOLUTION IS AND HOW THEY CAN AGREE ON AN APPROPRIATION BILL GOING FORWARD.

BUT IT WOULDN'T BE THESE DIRE CONSEQUENCES THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED A LITTLE BEFORE.

>>LORENE: YEAH, THE SHUTDOWN, IS THAT A CONTINUING RESOLUTION?

>>JEFF: WELL, IT WOULDN'T HAVE TO BE A CONTINUING RESOLUTION.

IT WOULD JUST BE A REGULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT WOULD SAY YOU KNOW THERE WILL BE CONTINUING FUNDING FOR THE NEXT YEAR OR SOMETHING AT THIS SOMEWHAT LOWER RATE UNTIL CONGRESS STEPS IN AND ADOPTS A NEW BUDGET, A NEW SET OF APPROPRIATION BILLS, SO THAT WOULD BE DONE.

AND THERE IS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR THIS, IN THE SENATE I THINK THERE IS LIKE EIGHT REPBULICANS WHO HAVE CO-SPONSORED ONE OF THESE BILLS AND TO MY MIND, IT WOULD MAKE ALL THE SENSE IN THE WORLD.

NOW YOU COULDN'T PASS IT THROUGH THE HOUSE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE HOUSE IS FOULED UP, THEY CAN'T PASS ANYTHING THROUGH THE HOUSE RIGHT NOW.

BUT IT IS A KIND OF THING WHICH IF WE MAKE SOME CHANGES IN THE MAKEUP OF THE HOUSE AND SENATE, WE CAN ENACT THIS LONG TERM AND IT WOULD BE A MAJOR STEP FORWARD.

ON THE DEBT CEILING, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY OUGHT TO GO TO A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE WHEN THE DEBIT CEILING HAS TO BE RAISED AS IT DOES EVERY YEAR OR TWO UNFORTUNATELY, I WISH THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE PROBLEM OF LARGE DEFICITS AND I TALK ABOUT HOW THE ONLY SUCCESSFUL EFFORT TO DEAL WITH THAT WAS UNDER PRESIDENT CLINTON, WHEN WE GOT TO A BALANCED BUDGET.

BUT ANY RATE WITH THE DEBT CEILING, THE PRESIDENT AND THE SECRETARY TREASURY OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO ADVISE THE CONGRESS WE NEED TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING TO THIS LEVEL AND THEN CONGRESS WOULD HAVE TO STEP IN AND INTERFERE WITH THAT IN ORDER TO KEEP IT FROM HAPPENING.

THAT WOULD BE A MUCH BETTER SYSTEM AND WE HAVE DONE THAT ONCE OR TWICE SORT OF A ONE-OFF OCCASION IN THE BUDGET ACT THAT WAS ADOPTED IN 2011.

WE HAD THAT KIND OF A PROVISION FOR PART OF THE INCREASE IN THE DEBT CEILING AND IT WAS SOMETHING THAT SENATOR MCCONNELL SUPPORTED AT THAT TIME AS A REPUBLICAN LEADER.

SO, AGAIN, I THINK THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION TO THAT CRISIS.

AND THEN ON THE FILIBUSTER, YOU MENTIONED THE FILIBUSTER, MY VIEW IS THAT WE NEED TO REPEAL THE ABILITY TO FILIBUSTER, WE NEED TO GIVE THE MAJORITY LEADER THE ABILITY TO BRING AN ISSUE OR A NOMINATION OR WHATEVER TO A VOTE IN A REASONABLE PERIOD OF TIME SO THAT IS MY VIEW.

AND THE FINAL EXAMPLE THAT I GIVE A SOLUTION ON IS THIS BUSINESS WHERE OF COURSE WHEN JUSTICE SCALIA DIED, AND PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS TRYING TO NOMINATE SOMEBODY, MERRITT GARLAND, AS IT TURNED OUT, TO BE ON THE SUPREME COURT, THE REPUBLICAN POSITION IN THE SENATE WAS WE ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE HIM A HEARING.

AND IT MAY BE ANOTHER ELEVEN MONTHS BEFORE HE LEAVES OFFICE BEFORE PRESIDENT OBAMA LEAVES OFFICE, BUT WE ARE JUST TO HOLD THIS POSITION VACANT UNTIL WE CAN GET A NEW PRESIDENT ON THE CHANCE THAT IT WILL BE A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT AND SURE ENOUGH THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED.

AND SO, YOU KNOW WHAT, TO MY MIND THAT WAS AN OUTRAGEOUS ABUSE OF CONGRESSIONAL POWER TO REFUSE TO GIVE THE PRESIDENT A HEARING ON HIS NOMINEE.

IF THEY WANTED TO VOTE MERRITT GARLAND DOWN AS THE NOMINEE, THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS.

>>LORENE: BUT NOT TO EVEN HOLD A HEARING.

>>JEFF: BUT NOT TO GIVE HIM A HEARING.

>>LORENE: AND TO SAY IT WAS SO CLOSE TO THE ELECTION, IT WAS ELEVEN MONTHS AWAY.

>>JEFF: YEAH, IT WAS ELEVEN MONTHS AWAY.

SO AT ANY RATE, THAT'S THE FOURTH EXAMPLE I GIVE IN THE BOOK OF A BREAKDOWN IN WHAT I CALL CONGRESSIONAL GOVERNING NORMS.

>>LORENE: YEAH.

>>JEFF: AND WHAT IT ALSO DOES IT PUTS PRESSURE ON THE DEMOCRATS, IF WE GET A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT ONE OF THESE DAYS, WHICH IS NOT UNLIKELY, GIVEN THE WAY THINGS GO BACK AND FORTH IN OUR SYSTEM.

WE GET A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT THE LAST YEAR OF HIS TERM OR HER TERM, IF YOU GET A VACANCY ON THE SUPREME COURT THERE IS A LOT OF PRESSURE ON DEMOCRATS TO SAY "NO, NO, WE ARE GOING TO DO EXACTLY WHAT THE REPUBLICANS DID WITH MERRITT GARLAND, AND WE ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE THEM A HEARING.

AND WE ARE GOING TO SEE IF WE CAN ELECT A DEMOCRAT IN THE FALL ELECTION AND LET THE NEXT PRESIDENT CHOOSE THE, YOU KNOW, BE THE SUPREME COURT NOMINEE."

SO AT ANY RATE, THERE ARE SOME OF THE SUGGESTIONS THAT ARE BURIED IN THERE.

>>LORENE: YOU DO SUMMARIZE THIS REMARK THAT THIS IS FULL OF GOOD ADVICE, BUT PUBLIC MODERATION AND DELIBERATION ISN'T GOOD MARKETING IN AN AGE OF CLICK BAIT DRIVEN EXTREMITIES.

YOU KNOW, THIS IS A VERY DEEP BOOK, YOU SAW, YOU BRING UP SO MANY OF THE PROBLEMS AND YOU PRESENT SUCH SIMPLE COMMON PLACE DOABLE SOLUTIONS.

>>JEFF: WELL THEY SEEM TO ME TO BE FAIRLY COMMONPLACE DOABLE.

>>LORENE: I DON'T MEAN COMMON PLACE, I MEAN COMMON SENSE.

>>JEFF: COMMON SENSE, YEAH.

NO I THINK THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE INTENDED TO BE AND I THINK MOST AMERICANS WOULD FAVOR SOLUTIONS ALONG THESE LINES BUT YOU SORT OF ENTER INTO A DIFFERENT WORLD WHEN YOU GET ELECTED INTO ONE OF THESE POSITIONS AND GO TO WASHINGTON.

YOU ARE SUBJECT TO ALL KINDS OF INFLUENCES THAT THE AVERAGE PERSON MAY NOT BE AWARE OF.

>>LORENE: YES, I CAN'T IMAGINE.

YEAH.

BUT IN YOUR 30 YEARS, YOU MASTERED A LOT OF THESE ISSUES AND THAT IS WHAT I LOVE ABOUT YOUR BOOK.

IT IS CALLED BREAK DOWN LESSONS FOR A CONGRESS IN CRISIS BY SENATOR JEFF BINGAMAN, WHO SERVED FOR 30 YEARS IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE, REPRESENTING NEW MEXICO SO WELL.

I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR PUBLIC SERVICE AND THE THINGS THAT YOU CONTINUE TO DO EVEN NOW FOR NEW MEXICO.

>>JEFF: WELL, I AM NOT DOING THAT MUCH.

BUT I... >>LORENE: WELL YOUR COMING HERE AND BRINGING US UP TO SPEED.

>>JEFF: WELL, I WAS HONORED TO REPRESENT THE STATE IN WASHINGTON AND WHEREVER I GET THE CHANCE, I TRY TO SPEAK UP ON ISSUES THAT I THINK ARE IMPORTANT.

>>LORENE: AND THE BOOK IS A REALLY GOOD WAY OF DOING THAT.

OUR GUEST TODAY IS SENATOR JEFF BINGAMAN WHO SERVED FROM 1983 TO 2013 - 30 YEARS IN THE US SENATE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK.

>>JEFF: THANK YOU, LORENE.

>>LORENE: AND I AM LORENE MILLS, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU, OUR AUDIENCE, FOR BEING WITH US TODAY ON REPORT FROM SANTA FE .

REPORT FROM SANTA FE IS MADE POSSIBLE, IN PART, BY GRANTS FROM THE NEW MEXICO MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, A BETTER NEW MEXICO THROUGH BETTER CITIES AND FROM