CNN "The Situation Room" - Transcript: Interview with Rep. Banks

Interview

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

BLITZER: We'll see what happens tomorrow together with you, Shimon. Thank you very much.

Let's discuss all of this and more. Republican congressman Jim Banks of Indiana is joining us, he's a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Congressman, thank you for joining us.

REP. JIM BANKS (R-IND.), MEMBER, ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE: Good to be with you, Wolf.

BLITZER: Let's begin with today's vote in the Senate blocking the president's national emergency declaration. When the House voted on this last month, you tweeted your own reservations about the president's decision. I'll put your tweet up on the screen.

"I support the president 100 percent on the need for stronger border security and a wall. But I can't deny my reservations about the precedent and implications the president's large-scale emergency declaration and its abuse by potential future Democrat administrations."

So despite your reservations, you voted against the resolution.

Why?

BANKS: I think a lot of us have reservations about the emergency powers authorities of the president. The way we're approaching it in the House, at least among a number of conservatives, is a look at ways to rein in that authority, not to cancel this particular emergency action the president has used to build the wall at the border.

I know if it were a matter of policy, that's what my constituents in Indiana want. They want to build the wall and they want greater border security. But the right way forward is to do what the president also agreed with today, that we should reform those authorities.

There will be efforts by Republicans and Democrats moving forward to do just that.

BLITZER: But you say let the president have this one but then go ahead and change the law, is that what you're saying?

BANKS: I hate to appear intellectually dishonest about this, Wolf. That's not the case. In this case, the president has exercised the authority that he has, that Congress granted him. I believe that that's very clear.

But the way forward for those of us who do have reservations about that authority that the president clearly has is to rein in that authority. That's why I'm working on legislation with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in the House to look at ways that we can reform that Emergency Powers Act and take much of that authority back away from the president and give it back to the legislative branch of the Congress. (CROSSTALK)

BANKS: -- the Senate or the House accomplishments that in either way.

[17:15:00]

BANKS: I think there's a better way to do it.

BLITZER: What do you say to the 12 Republican senators who voted against the president today?

BANKS: I don't know each of their groundings in doing so. I know they've expressed the same types of reservations that I explained, that I attempted to explain in my tweet to my constituents and which you shared with your viewers, Wolf.

But at the end of the day, the president did what Congress gave him the authority to do years before I became a congressman, exercising those emergency powers authorities. The best thing we can do is put a bill on the floor of the House or the Senate that would rein in those authorities and the president even tweeted today that he agreed with that way forward.

BLITZER: So would you say, assuming that no additional new legislation is passed, that a future Democratic president would have the authority to declare a national emergency, as the president has done, and to take Defense Department funds, for example, and use them for something else that the president considers to be a national emergency, like, let's say, gun control or climate change?

BANKS: Sure, Wolf. As a conservative, I am concerned about that precedent. But the precedent is already there. Presidents have declared since this authority was given to the president in the late '70s over 55 times that presidents have used the emergency powers authorities.

Even President Obama using those authority authorities for matters related to transnational gangs and President Clinton using those authorities for illegal drugs coming over the border as well.

So the precedent was already there before President Trump exercised it in this case. Again, I don't think canceling this particular emergency action by the president is the best way forward. Let's put legislation on the floor that reins in those authorities overall for him and future presidents. That's what I would support.

BLITZER: Because those 12 Republicans in the Senate that voted against the president, are deeply concerned this undermines the House of Representatives and the Senate, the legislative branch of the government, and gives added power to the executive branch, namely the president of the United States. He is now going to be forced to use his first veto since becoming

president because members of his own party refused to back him on what is clearly his signature issue, this border wall with Mexico.

Was this a significant rebuke to President Trump?

BANKS: I don't know if I would take it that way. But back to my earlier point, obviously if we put a bill on the floor that would rein in these emergency powers authorities, you're going to get a majority in the House and the Senate that would vote for those actions.

So why not move forward with legislation that does that?

That would accomplish a whole lot more than just in this one case, where clearly Democrats disagree with the wall funding, which is what this is all about at the end of the day.

BLITZER: I want to move on to another legislative issue. The House unanimously passed a resolution, demanding the full release of the special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia report to Congress and to the American public. That resolution passed 420-0.

You were among those voting in favor. As you know, the president keeps calling the whole Mueller investigation a witch hunt and a hoax.

Why did you vote in favor of releasing the final report?

BANKS: It's the right thing to do. It's what the vast majority of American people want. They want to draw their own conclusions from the final Mueller report. Whether they're Republicans or Democrats, conservative, liberal, whether they like President Trump or hate President Trump, almost all Americans want this to be public so that they can determine for themselves whether or not there is anything serious in the report that actions should be taken up on.

I've said from the very beginning, Wolf, that this investigation is important, that the actions by Russia to meddle in our election process in 2016 is real and serious.

And hopefully this report gets to the bottom of many of those matters so that the American people can see what really occurred and we can decide what to do about it moving forward.

BLITZER: Transparency is always good. Congressman Jim Banks, thanks for joining us.

BANKS: Great to be with you.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source