Remarks from Congressman Dave Joyce

- [Narrator] Production and distribution of "City Club Forums" on Idea Stream Public Media are made possible by PNC and the United Black Fund of Greater Cleveland Incorporated.

(upbeat music) (crowd chattering) (bell ringing) - Good afternoon.

Welcome to the City Club of Cleveland.

We are devoted to conversations of consequence that help democracy thrive.

Today is Friday, March 3rd.

I'm Rob Falls, member of the City Club Board of Directors and Chairman and CEO of Falls and Company.

It is my distinct honor to introduce Congressman Dave Joyce today.

The Congressman is a lifelong Ohioan, and a son of Cleveland.

He served as the Geauga County prosecutor for 25 years before being elected in 2012 as the Representative of the 14th District of Ohio.

During this time, Dave, I'm sorry, Congressman... Dave, fine, okay, (crowd laughing) has built a strong reputation for working across the aisle.

He has championed bipartisan bills in efforts to address pressing issues for all Ohioans.

These include efforts to end sexual violence, support our veterans, and secure critical funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative.

In 2020, Congressman received the inaugural Jefferson Hamilton Award for Bipartisanship from the US Department of Commerce.

And in 2022, he was ranked 31st among 435 members of Congress as one of the most bipartisan representatives.

He was also recognized as one of the most effective and bipartisan lawmakers by the Lugar Center in Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy.

Congressman Joyce is the ranking member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies.

His is also co-chair of the House Great Lakes Task Force, and a member of the Ethics Committee.

Today, we will hear more from Congressman Joyce on bipartisanship on the Hill, and his outlook for this coming or our current 118th Congress and more.

On a personal note, as a former senior staffer, I can recognize a true public servant.

You have to be open to other points of view, be objective, focused, and willing to stand up for what you believe.

I believe the Congressman has all of those.

Also joining us on the stage is our moderator for today's conversation, Andrew Meyer, Deputy Editor of Idea Stream Public Media.

Andrew has spent over three decades in broadcasting.

He has also served as WKSU's News Director since 2014.

If you have a question for the Congressman, you can text it to 330-541-5794.

That's 330-541-5794.

You can also tweet your question @thecityclub, and The City Club Staff will try to work it into the second half of the program.

Members, friends of the City Club, Ohioans, Clevelanders, and countrymen, please welcome Dave Joyce.

(audience applauding) - Thank you for being with us today, Congressman.

A number of questions to run through with you, and I think the one that a lot of people have concerns about these days, we're gonna start off with East Palestine and what's going on there with the latest.

First off, I just want to get your own assessment of how you feel the situation's been handled over these weeks since the derailment.

- Well, first off, thank you all for being here.

It's a pleasure.

Secondly, I believe that, you know, certainly Governor DeWine and the folks at the state have done everything they could do and are able to do for the folks there.

I mean, there's no community that's equipped for one of these type of disasters to occur.

The local fire departments aren't equipped.

Hell, states aren't even equipped for it.

I mean, there's a, the railroads need to have those type of people on the ground or doing something.

And you know, people made some decisions that they felt were of the best interest of the people with the science that they had in front of them and in the time that they thought was appropriate to do that.

Certainly everybody can Monday morning quarterback that, but right now, obviously, we gotta deal with what's there, deal with the cleanup, make sure that the people there are taken as close to a whole or or normal as they were the day before that incident occurred.

And one of the things, you know, everybody is trying to push for relief of some sort and obviously that Norfolk Southern is gonna have a lot to say with that and potentially the people whose products were involved are being transported that day.

But the one thing that I know Bill Johnson, since it's his district, has been leading the effort with the Buckeye delegation, was we put together a bill yesterday to try and make sure that whatever these people receive in compensation is not taxable.

So it goes towards actually fully funding their, their getting back in their homes and back to their way of life.

- This is definitely a learning moment in terms of railroad safety.

And Senators Brown and Vance have introduced legislation that would add safeguards to freight rails throughout the country.

From what you know, at this point, is it sufficient?

Is there something more that should be there?

Is it too much?

What's your 2 cents on that?

- Well, there were guards in place that maybe weren't adhered to.

And as you can see, some of the photos of the bearing melting down prior to that, you know, there should have been something to trigger the man response, which is the people on the train to slow that down because it was there, but it didn't occur.

So you just gotta deal with the facts as they are.

I think that there has to be more regulation and more training obviously, because if it's not going through a pipe system, then it has to be either on a railroad, which is considered the second system or on trucks, which is, not that they're unsafe, but it would be the third safest system in which to transport chemicals in this manner.

So as long as we're gonna be using those in manufacturing and throughout America, then they're gonna be transported one way or another.

So we need to make sure it's transported in the safest way as possible.

- Now these Norfolk Southern tracks, they go through your district, you mentioned Congressman Johnson's district is where East Palestine is, but what are your concerns at this point when it comes to rail safety in this interim period while we all figure out what really needs to be done next?

- Well, you know, we haven't done a good job of maintaining the systems or the tracks that are in place.

One of the biggest problems we have in our district is up through Lake Ashtabula, is the length of trains getting slowed down because they can't get through, not necessarily our town, but in Chicago where the chains or exchange of these things occur.

So therefore you have trains that are excessive in LEHNT that are blocking north-south thoroughfares and in some cases they're blocking emergency services from the southern half of their township or city or village.

And you know, unfortunately with the problems we've had with fentanyl or overdoses is that people have died because they couldn't get the EMS in time.

And that's a problem.

And I've been trying to work through those problems with them and, but you know, when you get down to it, it's a system-wide problem.

It isn't necessarily for, you know, Lake Ashtabula, and other communities throughout our country are facing the problems because the system itself isn't ready for the amount of traffic it's getting.

- Finally, on East Palestine, there was a community meeting last night, regional manager for EPA was there, representative Norfolk Southern was there.

When they addressed the crowd, there was a lot of skepticism, a lot of booing.

There's some significant health concerns there.

How would you reassure the people in East Palestine that they're being heard at this point?

- Well, obviously by the response that they've received to date, they're being heard.

The trouble is that you can't predict what their illnesses might be or the problems that they're having.

And so, you know, some of this unfortunately is gonna play out over time, and so we just gotta make sure that the people there have, and I think that again, the governor and I notice EPA Director Reagan has put a facility there as well to continue to do the monitoring and continue to do the testing and make sure they're getting the medical assistance that they need until we've worked this through.

- Thanks.

Let's move on to Ukraine.

We've just passed the one year mark in the war, the invasion by Russia of Ukraine, the ongoing war.

You've been supportive of aid to Ukraine.

How do you feel about where we are right now in terms of our support for Ukraine?

Does that need to change?

- You're just full of softballs?

(audience laughing) Look, you know, I believe in freedom and I believe America has to stand up for freedom throughout the world.

And that's what the Ukrainian people are fighting for.

And I think unfortunately, there's something to be said about a leader who's thought of as being just a little crazy, right?

Ronald Reagan was just a little crazy maybe.

And so you don't know what he's gonna do.

And unfortunately after Afghanistan, you have, you gotta remember that China and Russia, they don't have four year elections like we do and the same systems in place.

They're all for world domination.

And so when you have something like Afghanistan, you know, they start to push towards, you know, okay, well, and I can, let's see, Crimea was easy, now let's try on Ukraine.

And you know, I wholeheartedly applaud the citizens of Ukraine for the efforts that they've taken in the defense of their own country and their own democracy.

And that fight for freedom, hopefully, is a lesson for our youth here who've not had the opportunity, unfortunately, to see it firsthand or to witness people fighting for their freedom.

And I'm thinking the problem we've given aid, and we're gonna continue to give aid and we're gonna continue to see this through.

When you talk about, because we're not writing a blank check, what we want to make sure is that we're, the things that we're giving them are getting to them and getting used in an efficient matter.

And you can't just hand F-16s over to an Air force that's never flown an F-16.

It takes a lot of training, which unfortunately there's not enough of and not enough people to do it.

And since you can't have your own people involved and you have to have the train the people on the ground there to do that, that's the type of oversight that people wanna see and wanna understand make sure that the dollars, whether through equipment or dollars, whatever help is getting there, is actually getting to the people of Ukraine so they can continue their fight for freedom.

- You asked for a softball, here's one.

(laughing) I hope.

With the new Congress, the Republicans have the majority in the House.

- Yeah.

- What are the opportunities that are there for you, and more importantly, your constituents in northeast Ohio that weren't there previously?

- Well, you know, first off, I'm not mathematically challenged.

I know we don't have the Senate and we don't have the presidency.

So the idea that we're going to have, pass bills in the House, you know, you have to have bipartisan support or they're not gonna go anywhere.

So secondly, I think what we all witnessed on January 3rd through the 6th, much to the chagrin of Speaker McCarthy and his family who had to sit through it or, you know, my son, my 30 year old son who could care less what his old man does for a living was actually, you know, I'm walking off the floor at 1:30 AM Saturday morning after just doing a hit on CNN and he texted me about, Hey, that wasn't bad, dad.

You almost sounded like you knew what you're talking about.

(audience laughing) And so I called him realizing he's up, and I mean, Hey pal, you know, what'd you think?

He goes, oh, I've watched the whole thing.

You know, it was ugly, but it was an exercise in democracy and there was some people just hate Kevin, I get that.

But in putting together the package to finally get him to Speaker, there's a lot of folks who sort of sat in their own camps.

You know, when I came in under Boehner and I watched it through Ryan and now on to with Kevin being in charge.

And so from November on, when we saw this, after we won the majority before this buildup, it was unfortunately a waste of time.

We should have been nominating Kevin as a speaker and been getting to our committees and our assignments and going from there, but that didn't occur.

So January, up to January we were meeting his groups trying to figure out what, what is it that's gonna take you to get behind Kevin?

And you know, they couldn't beat somebody with nobody and they didn't really, and as it showed during the, for that time period, they didn't have anybody else.

Some of 'em just hated Kevin.

And some of them wanted things that we've eventually adopted and actually they're good for us, they're good for the house as a whole, open up the house.

The idea that from, towards the end of John's period and Paul Ryan and then with the Speaker Pelosi, the ideas or the big ticket issues were coming from the speaker's office and going to the floor.

And there wasn't the debate, the honest debate that's necessary to work out the issues.

And we find that as some of these things pass, they're like, well nobody contemplated that because the committees of jurisdiction never had the chance to hear those things.

You never had the chance for bipartisan debate in those committees to help wean those problems out.

And then passing a bill in the committee and then going to the floor where the same amendment process can take place and continue to hone this until you have something that you can pass that goes over to the Senate.

And by that point the Senate has seen the product, so you hopefully have some bipartisan buy-in there, but you know, senators always gotta do their thing and touch it a little bit.

And eventually get something in the president's desk for a signature.

That's what I thought I got elected to go do.

And that's the thing that's been missing and I'm looking forward to that coming back.

And I think the good part is on a bipartisan basis, everybody realizes, not pretty as those days were, it's promoting a much healthier House and debates that'll take place in the House.

- You say you look forward to that coming back, the slim majority that gummed up the works in getting the speakers seated from January 3rd through the 6th.

Have things calmed down since then?

Is there more unity within the Republican party in the House?

- Yes, you know, and Kevin refers to it as the five families.

They sort of hate that idea.

(laughing) We're different groups.

And the worst part is obviously he's not a Godfather fan 'cause he, you know, muddles all the other analogies he makes when we're all together.

But, you know, the idea is that we are all come to it when, I'm the chair of the Republican Governance Group, we're about 50 members.

We go from an R26 to D+12 districts and we consider ourselves some majority makers.

We don't have an agenda other than trying to work through the bills that we have.

And then we'll have our individual agendas, which we all try to get each other behind and try to push things and like, you know, the things that matter like the, you know, for me obviously the Great Lakes, then you, you sell those folks on why these are important.

Well then you have problem solvers, you'll have group called Main Street, you have the Hispanic Caucus and then you'll have the Freedom Caucus.

So there's these five different groups and all of us were, you know, have some ideas, but when you get down to our group's, Republican Governance Group, and the Republican Study Council, all told, we're 190 members out of the 222.

So that's an effective group and if you have all of them behind something, it's a little easier to help get the folks that you need to get to the 222.

But better yet, you know, just to give an idea, I was working with some, my friends trying to figure out what we're gonna do about the debt ceiling and there's, you know, six of us republicans and six of us Democrats, and we're like, well, what do you think it'll take to get some people here and what do you take think it'll take to get some people there?

I go, no, no, no, let's work on a bill that gets 109 of each party 'cause we could do that then we won't have to worry about the rest.

What is it gonna take to get to that?

And it was sort of funny, but it was like a novel concept to them.

- Make a prediction, are we going to default?

Are we going to default because we don't raise the debt limit?

- No, it's not happening.

- Okay.

Talk a little bit about.

- It might be a bad dance for a few days, but it's not happening.

(audience laughing) - Let's talk about overall in the house and bipartisan, bipartisanship in Congress.

You referenced that.

We hear a lot about the partisan rancor, and there are prognostications from pundits saying, well nothing's going to get done in this Congress.

What's the reality?

Where are we actually seeing right here and now common ground?

- Well, you know, unfortunately it was prime, set for prime time, but I didn't find any stations actually showing it.

It was the other night with the China hearings, and you know, that was a good idea and a good concept of Kevin's to put the group out there.

And then because of the people that he placed on the committee, he showed his seriousness in wanting to get this done.

And Hakeem did the same thing and putting the serious members that he wants and start to get to work on the problems that we have with China.

I mean, again, China's not our friend.

China is an enemy.

China is selling the precursors for fentanyl in Mexico and killing as we know, hundreds of thousands of kids.

We have to declare war on this.

I mean it needs to stop, and you know, whether they're stealing our technology or the other things they're doing, we are at war with China in, on a number of different levels and we need to really address that.

And I think a primetime showing like that shows, it's not a Republican thing or a Democrat thing, it's an American thing and we all need to get behind it and start to work on ways we can fix the problem.

- I want to extend the Republican/Democrat divide and maybe the bridge there by looking at the relationship with the White House.

Do you see ways that the Republicans can work with President Biden?

- Yes, but you know, Kevin had us sit down with President Biden and they came out from it saying, agreeing they were gonna work on the debt ceiling.

And they had an agreement that they weren't gonna talk about cutting Medicare or social security.

And then we saw what the president did at the State of the Union, and that's great political theater, but when you're trying to negotiate with people in good faith, I mean all you're ever truly worth is you're handshake and your word on the Capitol Hill.

And you have to, people have to trust you to be an honest broker.

And if you're gonna say one thing in private and then go out and play to the media a whole different story, you're not gonna get a hell of a lot of people to behind you to help you with the bigger issues that are coming forward.

And so it, I think that was, I wish they would tone that down because nobody wants to cut the funding from Medicare or Social security to seniors.

Let's get that out there right now.

Democrats don't wanna do it, Republicans don't want to do it.

However, we need to start talking, and we, you know, nobody over 65, people 55 to 65, as I say, on the glide path to retirement, they should know that they're going to get their benefits.

However, if you're gonna be serious about the things that are driving the national debt, you have to talk about mandatory spending.

When I first got there now a decade ago, when I got on appropriations, it was 66% mandatory, 34% discretionary.

It's now up to 74% mandatory and 26% discretionary.

We're never gonna cut our way back to fiscal sanity just on the discretionary side.

There has to be a discussion on all these issues.

And that's why I'm, I'm really hopeful for the, what you see with this China task force.

Because I think it'd be more important if we start to do one on what are the things driving our mandatory debt and lay out to the American people, they're not stupid, you know, lay out to the American people, here are the problems, here are the potential solutions.

Here's where we're at.

weigh into your congressman, weigh into your senator as to what you think the options are and get the public momentum behind it.

People understand shared sacrifice, but they have to know why they're sacrificing in, you know, in the short term to get there.

Otherwise, you know, to say we're gonna do nothing, which is the program that seems to be in place now, is that we're gonna run outta money in 2034, probably 2032 to be truthful.

And what happens when you run outta money for social security, everyone gets a 20% slash right off the top, boom.

And then you're gonna still have to start to pay into the system.

Secondly, like my 30 year old and my 29 year old and my 27 year old who are paying into the system, we're lying to them, we're absolutely lying to them because there's gonna be nothing there.

It's a shell game and they're paying into social security they'll never see.

So it's time to be truthful about it and what we're gonna do to fix these programs and lay out that vision for the American people and work towards that.

- It seems like this is a conversation we keep coming back to year after year after year.

Something needs to be done to fix it, fix the issue with social security, but there doesn't seem to be the political will to make the hard choices.

How can you be certain that there's gonna be any different with this Congress?

- Well, and why don't we have that will, is because just what President Biden went right out and did.

You're gonna cut the seniors, you're gonna cut their, their social security and Medicare.

No one said that, but that's a great political hit.

Now try answering that in 15 to 30 seconds.

Rob, you're an ad guy.

Yeah, you're done.

(laughing) You know, and it happened to me when I first got to DC, you know, I joined all these different groups, and you know, I'm voting for the budgets hell, let everybody's budget get out there.

The one that succeeds, we'll get behind.

Well, in the RSC budget down there, it had cutting Social security and Medicare.

And next thing I know I'm getting these ads up on the social media.

I never voted for that.

Oh, but it was in this way down here in the bottom of this budget that you, you know, voted for in Congress.

My mistake, won't let that happen again.

But you know, you realize that's a potent ad and it's a misleading ad and it's time, unless we educate the American public to where we're at, it's an ad that still exists.

- In Rob's introduction, he mentioned some of your committee assignments and one of them is on the ethics committee.

Some news in the last 24 hours with the committee announcing a probe of New York Congressman George Santos.

A number of congressmen including a number of Republicans have called for his resignation.

Where do you stand on George Santos?

- Well, on top of being on ethics committee and then being the, appointed the lead investigator on the Santos matter, I'm not gonna comment at all.

- Fair.

(audience laughing) - I learned it from you.

- Had to put it out there.

(laughing) Let's shift to the Great Lakes.

- Sure.

- You've been a very strong proponent during your time in Congress of measures to support the health and wellbeing of the Great Lakes.

There was a study that was released in the last week from the Alliance for the Great Lakes that pointed out the fact that we are not on target to reduce phosphorous runoff into the lake by the goals that were set eight years ago.

The deadline is two years from now.

I don't know if there's more than just, it's a point in time where we're saying, oh, we're gonna reduce it by 40% by that point.

If there are issues that the states will be facing if they don't meet those goals, but it's not encouraging when those runoffs continue to generate significant algal blooms in the lake summer after summer.

What, what comes next?

What can you do next to help with promoting the health of the lake and especially dealing with these ongoing issues with algal blooms?

- Sure.

The one thing that I have gotten in place and wanted to make sure we kept in place was the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, and the funding, therefore.

And because I'm not a scientist, I don't pretend to be one, but one thing I know in DC is that funding comes in stops and starts.

And the one thing we can't do is do that with, when it comes to this type of work.

So we needed a continuous path.

And so somebody who's starting a project for the, an experiment in year one doesn't have to worry about in year two, year three or four, their funding being cut.

They could continue through and try to find better ways to do that.

Obviously one of the systems was when you bring up the phosphorus, was educating farmers that they could yield more with less fertilizer and educating them on when to fertilize and making sure it's not putting it on and then getting big rainstorm that runs it all off, you know, you go way back to dry the fields.

We put in clay tiles to help drain the fields and the field then would drain into a creek which would drain into a river, which would drain into the lake.

So a lot of the work that we've been doing, the Western Reserve Land Conservancy has been doing a great job of this, of going back and buying up some of these old tracts and instead of the main line of the creek going back to the old serpentine method and redoing it so that water as it rises, goes on to the fields versus going in a straight shot out to the lake, building more wetlands.

I mean that's nature's kidneys and making sure we'd continue to develop those around the Great Lakes system.

But the Great Lakes, you know, it's interesting to me that the, it was a early lesson.

I sat back and I was trying to figure out where can I make my mark, where can I, where does Joyce fit in in here?

And I didn't hear anybody speaking up.

And I know my predecessor, God bless him, Steve La Tourette was big on it and certainly Senator Portman, and we've lost a giant in the house and the Senate in losing Rob Portman.

He's a superhuman being.

But with their guidance, I figured out, well, you know, this is some way that I can be helpful.

And so I went out and started putting it together with the Great Lake Restoration, the five year funding, blah, blah blah.

And I went first to Democrats and Republicans who were along the Great Lakes and got them involved.

And I said, now come on, get your, get the rest of your state delegation involved.

And we eventually got it to the floor and that was a fight getting through because the transportation and infrastructure chairman didn't believe it was germaine to the bill, but we got it into word, we got it passed on the floor and passed 408 to 17.

That's what I learned.

Gotta get momentum going.

And I have the 17 names laminated.

(laughing) But, you know, and it's those type of things where you, you have to spend the time and sit down with members and explain to 'em what it takes and why it's important to have this funding source in place and why to make sure that continues ongoing efforts and funding the people.

And then, you know, I was down in the Everglades because they have the same problem with algal blooms down there that we have up here and meeting with the Everglades Foundation and folks there and bringing them up and getting them to go to the Ohio State Stone Creek lab to see the things we've been doing up there, and trying, you realize eventually that people have this issue just about every state.

They just don't address it or it doesn't, didn't choke off their water supply like it did in Toledo and Lebanon.

So therefore it isn't as pronounced, but getting the people to understand it's gonna continue to be a problem unless we address it, has been very helpful to getting people involved in maintaining those funding flows for the Great Lakes.

- So that report that came out cited that it would take maybe another 200, maybe another $300 million to really meet that goal by 2025.

Can you get your colleagues in Congress to buy into pony up that money?

- One thing I find is every organization says they need money.

So, (laughing), you know, the cannabis industry is the only thing that's ever come to DC saying they wanna be taxed and regulated.

(audience laughing) Everybody else doesn't want to be, or, and you know, the foundations want money and everybody thinks more money would create better science.

I think it's more effective to have, what we've tried to do is sit down and say, okay, you know, what have you done?

What's the research showing?

How are we gonna fix the problem and is giving you more money going to fix the problem?

And that's the way we've tried to address this in interior.

- Cannabis.

- Yeah.

- You're on the Congressional Cannabis Caucus.

I have to say I was unaware there was a Congressional Cannabis Caucus until the last 24 hours.

Joking aside about it, this could be the year that Ohioans get the vote on the legalization of recreational marijuana in the state.

The serious nature of the caucus is that you're focused on ironing out those conflicts that exist with states passing their own laws on the legalization, whether it be medicinal or recreational and federal laws, which still determine it a controlled substance.

Is there the willpower in Congress to change the federal laws so that there's not this schism between what the states want to do and what the federal government says they need to do.

- Sure, you know, McCarthy always jokes that I'm a happy warrior.

You know, one day he is like, man, you're always smiling.

And I said, and it's not even cannabis.

(audience laughing) No, it was one of those things where, again, you know, I believe we're a country of laws and laws have to have effect, either that or you take the laws off the book.

And so, you know, we've developed, and as I saw it develop here in Ohio, you realized that, you know, the oversight that the state was doing it.

And yet, you know, here you are with these considered, you know, legal ongoing concerns here in the state that have done everything the state's told 'em to do, but they can't use the banking system.

They're not, they can't use the tax system.

We still call it a schedule one drug similar to fentanyl or something else.

And, you know, it just doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense.

And so I first voted on something when it, it was back in 2013, it came up in a VA Mil-Con hearing in appropriations, and the gentleman from California was making the case that they couldn't prescribe the cannabis to veterans in his Monterey VA facility, even though in the state at that point, it was medicinally legal.

And he made a great case for it.

And I thought, you know, that doesn't sound right.

And so I said to, you know, I listened to it, I voted with it and I summoned to Speaker Boehner's office and he is like, what the hell you doing?

And I said, well, you know, I explained to him, he goes, yeah, yeah, don't vote for it again.

And I said, well John, it doesn't make any sense.

He goes, Don, don't vote for again.

Okay, well I continued to vote for again.

And it's kind of those kind of things, it just start to say, well it just doesn't make sense.

And so, you know, and then since then it looks, expanded throughout the country.

I mean in 47 states, territories, everywhere else.

It's in some way, shape or form legal.

So let's do what's necessary to make sure that those that are already being regulated by the state and already being overseen by the state, they enjoy the same tax laws that all of the other legal concerns can enjoy, and they get the cash out of the business and get it into the banks and get it into, and let's face it, Goldman Sachs doesn't care about this or any big banks.

It's credit unions.

It's small counties that, you know, this is good banking for them.

And then what does that do?

That spurs business in those communities.

So it actually works out for the communities as well.

And you know, I'm all for if a city doesn't want it or a village or township, then they don't have it.

You know, they have the ability to do what they want with it.

But if it's gonna be here, then let's deal with it in a way that makes sense.

(audience applauding) - Thank you gentlemen.

Good questions, good answers.

I enjoyed it.

We're about to begin the audience Q&A.

We welcome questions from everyone, City Club members, guests, students, republicans, democrats, independents, and those joining our, via livestream at cityclub.org, radio broadcast at 89.7, Idea Stream Public Media.

May we have our first question please.

- I preface my question to you by saying that I am a lifelong card carrying Republican.

And one of the great healthy things about our society is having a healthy two-party system.

Checks and balances.

But I am very worried about the Republican party and its future.

You always have the conservatives and the liberals now, but presently we have a Republican party where a, fortunately a minority, but still a strong minority of right wing, I call 'em wingnuts that are taking over the party, controlling the party.

Don't believe that they lost the election in 2020, where they can't even spell the word civility.

And the word compromise is a dirty word.

What do you recommend that we as a party and those who act in the party, what can we do to get away from this group that is their way or the highway and within their own party, defeating and against fellow Republicans because they don't follow that wingnut indoctrination.

You are, as pointed out, as Ralph pointed out, you have been very active in working on a compromise or good side here on both sides.

What do you recommend to us to save the party and in fact, have, if we don't, the impact it's gonna have on this country?

- Thank you mayor.

That's a very interesting question that I think most Republicans grapple with on a daily basis.

I think we have to take back our party, and you know, I say that right at the grassroots county levels because if you look, some of the people you refer to as election deniers, wingnuts, that's, you know, they're now starting to go after state parties and using their positions, trying to take over the state chairman and getting involved in state parties and getting, you see 'em in in local parties too because, you know, most Americans are hardworking folks like yourself, and you know, they may go to local party meeting if, you know, they have some type of reason to, like, they've been invited by a friend, want to hear somebody speak, but they're not gonna go up there.

But these folks go because to them it's entertainment and these folks have these radical agendas, and you know, and it's something that I think we really need to start talking about.

America isn't far right or far left, it's right there center right, center left on any given election.

And I think it's important that the candidates continue to make the case that, why you're important and why it's important to have people who are thoughtful and considerate and understand that you don't have to scare people to make our country work.

You need to work with folks and you know, you may not get everything you want, only Mrs. Joyce gets that, (audience laughing) but you know, we can certainly work on trying to get America on the right track and that takes electing good people and making the case for 'em.

And you know, it's rough.

I gotta tell you it's been very rough and you know, I feel bad for some of the people that we're driving out and some of the people that are coming in, but it takes listening too.

And that's one thing in DC that's in very short supply.

You got a lot of people who think they're great, and you know, you have people who realize, they see the craziest thing and then they can get on TV, and then, you know, then they, once they say that, then all of a sudden they're working on their donors, which are the other people who feel disaffected like they are and that they, you know, send them $25.

And you know, I'll point out because it's true, is a guy like Matt Gaetz.

I mean that's, Gaetz will tell you that's the secret to his fundraising.

That's how he exists, is by saying these crazy things, by opposing Kevin and saying, we gotta fight, we gotta fight.

Well what are you fighting for?

You don't have another candidate, you don't have, you know, it was, it just, it was exasperating.

And, but you understand that, that they look at this as that, you know, their fundraising machine and their press and all and that's what they're in office for and it's up for the good people of his district to see through that.

And I think it's gonna take time.

But I really feel, and you know, I'm a Broncs fan and I think we're gonna get the Super Bowl someday, (audience laughing) but I really feel like, you know, we're gonna get there.

It's just gonna take some time and we gotta continue to remember that there's a majority of good people in this country that really cared about their country.

And I approach it like I do when I approach the house.

There's 435 people here who love their country.

We understand there's problems and we might see the solutions in different ways, but if you take the time to listen to each other, we might be able to agree on more than we disagree on and try to work towards getting results.

That's what I think we also have to do as a party.

And for everyone up there shouting you down, say no, you know, I'm sorry but we tried that, it didn't work.

- Okay, over here.

- Congressman, good afternoon.

We've had something like 70 mass shootings in this country this year.

People are getting shot in church, they're getting shot in grocery stores, at nightclubs.

Children are getting shot in their schools.

The Republican party has basically taken gun control off the table and seems only interested in addressing marginal issues like healthcare or mental healthcare or school security.

Is the Republican party willing to have the urgency you mentioned on fentanyl on this uniquely American issue of gun violence.

Is it willing to consider gun control in any level?

And if not, what solution do you have to this epidemic of violence?

(audience applauding) - So great question Ed and I wish I had an answer for you.

As you know, I'm the only member of the House of Senate who's handled the school shooting, and you know, I hadn't been opposed in Geauga County since '92.

And I came home that night and I told my wife, I'm done.

I just can't take this anymore.

One thing, you know, Steve retiring, and one thing fell into another, that's how I ended up there.

But you know, after Sandy Hook, when then Vice President Biden was gonna start a, you know, blue ribbon commission, I sent him a handwritten letter, said, you know, Mr. Vice President, I unfortunately had to learn about this and I unfortunately had to do a lot of homework getting ready for trial.

And I could tell you it's heartbreaking.

And I could tell you that, you know, when I sat across from that kid, because, you know, in Geauga County, we didn't have a holding cell for juveniles.

So he is up in my office waiting to go down for his appearance.

And I went and talked to him about his case, but I got the kid a Gatorade and you know, just don't talk to me on it.

But just looking at the kid, you realize he had no clue what he did, no idea the permanence of what he just did.

And unfortunately, you know, we have to think in society, how do we get to this point?

We're raising kids, they're this far out of touch.

The guns are one thing, you know, I get that, but you know, we're never gonna take back the guns that are out there anyhow.

So that's, you know, I think when you talk about taking back guns or those type of things, that's where you get the pushback with the Second Amendment folks.

But I do think you belittled and I fought hard for, and the reason I voted for it was the money that we got into mental health and addressing mental health.

Because back in our day, you know, there used to be institutions around the state.

We gave up on that and our corrections facilities have become our mental institutions.

And unfortunately we're not treating 'em there either.

And so these people are going out and continuing to grow in the area.

And there's, you know, obviously, there's serious mental issues.

And I'll tell you, you know, one of the things that moves me profoundly, back in my days in, in law school, I used to go downstairs and in those days you asked to read the vital speeches of the day.

And one of, and so obviously JFK, RFK, Martin Luther King, folks like that were the things I would read.

But it was in this room, RFK, the day after Martin Luther King was shot, gave a hell of a speech, the mindless menace of violence.

And a matter of fact, I read it to myself when I sat in my office alone on January 6th because it talks about the same thing.

And that was in 1968 and we haven't done a thing to cure that since then.

He talked about Hollywood, he talked about how we, we've created the society where we lavish armaments on governments everywhere about how the Hollywood industry has put out all these things about death and gore.

What's changed?

You know, we've even made 'em in the games now where they do that.

Nothing's changed there.

So I think, you know, I understand where you go with the just the guns 'cause people think that's gonna be easy.

But you know, we haven't cured the problem with drunken driving and people getting killed, you know, and they're not taking away the cars.

I'm a hunter, I have a gun.

As Dick will tell you I'm not too good with it.

I miss a lot of birds, but I try.

But you know, I don't have an issue with it on that respect, but I don't think that just saying we're gonna take everybody's gun is gonna change the program.

We really need to do a deep dive on what's affecting our, our kids and why we're producing people who are this deranged that they think that this is something that they should be doing.

- I really appreciate your approach to bipartisan legislation.

So I have a question about that Part A and part B, and I'll give you both at the same time.

As a house leader associated with moderates, what three areas of bipartisan work do you prioritize?

And a follow up to that is the Equal Rights Amendment is a bipartisan resolution.

Do you support equal rights for women?

And the ERA which says equality under the law cannot be denied or abridged by the United States or any states on account of sex.

- I'm with you on B, let's go back to A.

You know what our group does, (laughing).

You know what our group does is we sit and sort of review the bills that are coming in place that week and we talk about and debate those things on where we stand.

And then the larger picture items will be things like, you know, climate, I'm on bipartisan climate caucus solutions and you know, I'm also on a conservative climate caucus solutions because I do believe that we have to stop, you know, just saying it doesn't exist and talk about it and educate folks what America's done because America's truly been a leader in the world and some of the things we're doing and we can get better at it.

But you know, we again, as a party, I think we, we heard ourselves by not admitting to that.

Yeah, there's issues out there but you know, here's the things we can do to address those issues.

You know, the bipartisan stuff is on an evolution of ideas basis.

It depends on what the bill's being pushed and where the bipartisanship moves and getting involved in those and then being able to sell, say, like in the debt ceiling debate, if we can't get it done in the side of the Republican conference, well what, what are we gonna have to do with as far as getting more votes from the Democratic side?

What do they want?

And it's an important part of having those discussions, just having the ability to, in a room and the energy to be able to sit down and do those type of things.

And it takes time to listen.

And part of the Cannabis Caucus thing was that I have a bill with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and it's about, it's called HOPE.

And the idea was that, and god bless Mayor Bibb 'cause he tried to do this here in Ohio and realized what the problem was.

But people who have been convicted, you know, starting back in seventies when we started the war on drugs, I mean it's mostly people of color .

And so they have one offense.

They can't get SBA financing, they can't get homes, they can't get jobs, and it, it just makes no sense that we make it cost prohibitive for people to be able to get that.

And so, you know, the 50 states have 50 different ways to go about the expungement program.

And so I invited, she had some great ideas and I invited her over the office and it was supposed to be a half hour and it went on for about 55 minutes.

and it was a very nice conversation and I, I told her at the end of it, I said, Alexandria, 95% of what you just said, no Republican's ever were gonna agree with, but you know, we can agree on this.

And we talked about and work together our teams to develop HOPE.

And I've done the same thing with Hakeem and PREPARE.

It's like if the mayor, if the cannabis industry put out tomorrow that cannabis was, you know, fully legal, what would you do with it?

You know, no state knows how to do it.

No, there's no plan.

Well let's let's start to do those type of things to prepare if and when it does roll out throughout the country that, that there's things out there and working back and forth with the Hakeem.

And we're gonna put it up again this year because it, bills term out after each congress, but we're gonna put it up again this time.

But it takes sitting down and working with them and just listening and then being honest with them, look, you know, I get it and I can't sell that, you know.

Here's what I might be able to sell.

and starting to agree on the things you can agree on.

And then the things you disagree we could put off for another day while we try to get people who agree with us on the things that we can agree upon and build up momentum.

And that takes time and it takes listening and it, you know, it's not the kind of stuff that gets you on the news that gets you out there and CNN, but it's the kind of stuff that actually gets work done.

And so you've heard this that there's show horses and there's work horses and so I like to think there's a whole stable full of us workhorses that are just quietly trying to get our work done because that's what you elected us to do.

(audience applauding) Yes sir?

- Congressman, thank you for your support of the Great Lakes.

I have a specific question around the sources of phosphorus and that has to do with the very large feeding facilities that have very little regulation on the water discharge that's a huge source of phosphorus into the Great Lakes.

And I tie that to the recent East Palestine issues where it's an example of the Republican party typically favoring industry over the people.

And I wonder what your reaction is to what can we do to regulate these large sources of phosphorus to improve the quality of the Great Lakes?

Thank you.

- I wish I had a good answer for you.

You know, it's something that again, you believe the states to do and I one thing about, you know, certainly Governor DeWine, he's been very helpful in, in doing the things that are necessary, but I'm not sure exactly, and I'm not gonna lie to you or make it up like I do know.

I mean, I'm not sure what we can do.

But I'm sure we need to do something more because phosphorus is a thing that's the choke point for us.

That's what creates the habitat for that algal blooms to continue to grow.

And it's very serious because it, you know, you know, I have people approaching me all the time how they're gonna turn algal blooms into fuel.

They just need money.

I'm like, yeah, yeah, I get it.

But you know, first do that and then we'll talk about the money.

But you know, it's tough to find programs that are actually effective at dealing with it, but stopping the, and that's what we've tried to do with our first thing was educating folks how bad it is and how to not do that, make sure we don't put it into our systems, in our streams.

- I think we have time for maybe another question or two.

- All righty.

- So our next question is a text question.

It says, Congressman Joyce, while I understand your strident language regarding China, unfortunately I think a follow up is in order specifically, there are some who might see our fellow Chinese Americans as the enemy.

So can you please clarify the difference for those who might not understand the obvious difference?

Thank you.

I'm sorry I felt so compelled to reach out.

- I'm glad you did.

I apologize for that, if it was perceived in that way.

I don't mean Chinese people, I mean the Chinese government and the tactics that they take and it's certainly their leader in leadership being the ones who are the foes here and they're the ones who are actively doing this and pushing forward on a process that is to eventually start or take over with world domination.

And it's interesting if when I first got to Congress, since, you know, I used to say I was a former prosecutor, so I was good on evidence in courtroom procedures, but I didn't really know the a lot about some of these things.

There's a book by Michael Pillsbury, "The hundred-Year Marathon", that talked about how China since 1945, the things that they've done.

And if you, after you start reading, it's like, boy, that makes sense.

My dad was in the steel business, I understand that, you know, everybody's losing their business to cheaper made steel in China.

And what does that do, that closes down our plants?

Well God forbid we get in a world war and we don't have production facilities to be able to create steel, be able to create our own ammunition.

That'd be quite a problem.

- Congressman, in addition to the policy issues that you've talked about and that you've been asked about, there are also process issues that sometimes have a big effect on how an institution works.

And one of the process issues that you hear legislators talking about is the influence of money and the corruption, the corrupting influence that some money can sometimes have and the need of office holders to constantly be working on raising enough money to run again.

Is there an appetite in the congress for campaign finance reform and is there a route to campaign finance reform as you see it?

- You know, the sad part is it would sort of require calling detente.

Everybody's gotta stop waging war at each other and no one wants to do that, unfortunately.

I mean, to me it's the single worst thing you have to do as a congressman is, you know, I've never, I was a prosecutor, I never asked the people for a dime, you know?

It was one of those things where, and you have to do it unfortunately because, you know, a race is a minimum is $2.5-$3 million.

That's your money and plus the outside money that comes in if you don't.

And if you don't raise money, then you're viewed as weak and then you'll have opponents because they think, well, he is not running again or she's not running again and they go after that way.

I don't believe that there's necessary, I haven't heard a lot of people talking about, you know, ways to fix it.

But, you know, the part that makes me squeamish is the fact that when you see somebody like Marjorie Taylor Greene who first got there and she went out and said the things she was saying and then Speaker Pelosi thought she should be taking off her committees which she wore as a badge of honor, she raised $3.25 million dollars in the first quarter online.

So, you know, you get other folks say like Lauren Boebert who think, well you think that's crazy, hold my beer.

(audience laughing) You know, and it perpetuates that and it's not a good look for our Congress and it's not a good look for DC and you know, it's one of those things where I wish there was some set system or you're allocated $2.5 million dollars similar to well the presidential race, they don't even do that.

And we tried doing that with the, you know, donate a dollar in, in presidential campaign, and no one takes that money anymore 'cause they all wanna spend more.

So there has to be a way to fix it.

And I'm not sure exactly what that is, but you know, I think we've seen in Ohio that when they passed term limits in 94, I'll tell you, I think it's a failed experiment.

I don't think we, they achieved the goals that they thought.

And unfortunately you got some people who get to Congress and this is their highest and best use, and so therefore they're gonna continue to do whatever it takes so they could come back there because they're somebody.

And there's a lot of, unfortunately, people doing that.

But I will tell you, never once have I had somebody come in and say, we gave you money, so you should do this.

That doesn't exist.

Do they, if somebody's doing that, you know, then they should be prosecuted for it because that's bad.

If you're not giving money for good government, then you know, keep your money.

- Okay.

Thank you, Congressman Dave Joyce and Andrew Meyer for an outstanding forum today.

Thank you so much, both of you.

(audience applauding) We'd also like to welcome guests at the tables hosted by Cuyahoga Community College, Falls and Company, Greater Cleveland Partnership, Jewish Federation of Cleveland, Corman Jackson, and Krantz, and the Welsh Academy at St. Ignatius High School.

Thank you all for being here today.

Next Wednesday, March 8th, the city club will welcome Mayor Annette Blackwell of Maple Heights, Mayor Kim Thomas, Richmond Heights, and Mayor Gigi Trayer of Newberg Heights for International Women's Day.

The conversation will focus on the role that black women leaders play in our changing political landscape.

It should be a real good one.

And the following week, Wednesday, March 15th, executives from Detroit, Eastern Market, Cincinnati's Findlay Market, and Baltimore's Public Markets, will join Cleveland Mayors Justin Bibb, for a discussion about the history of public markets and their roles as community anchors.

You can learn about these forums and others at cityclub.org.

That brings us the end of today's forum.

Thank you once again, Congressman Joyce and Andrew Meyer.

And thank you members, friends of the City Club.

I'm Rob Falls, and this forum is now adjourned.

(bell chiming) (audience applauding) - [Narrator] For information on upcoming speakers or for podcasts of the City Club, go to cityclub.org.

(digital chiming tones) - [Narrator] Production and distribution of "City Club Forums" on Idea Stream Public Media are made possible by PNC, and the United Black Fund of Greater Cleveland Incorporated.