>> firm are studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." >> jack has the distinction of having worked and succeeded in

some of the toughest jobs in washington and the private sector. as a congressional staffer in the 1980's, he helped negotiate tip o'neill ton save social security. under president clinton, he presided over three budget surpluses in a row. so for all the talk out there about deficit reduction, making sure our books are balanced, this is the guy who did it. >> jack lew is here. served in his role since last february. previously he served as director of the office of management -- management and budget for president obama and president clinton. he began as an aid to speaker tip of neil -- to o'neill. straight house of representatives passed the debt ceiling increase, alleviating growing pressure he -- pressure on the treasury to pay its bills. i'm pleased to have jack lew

back at this table. welcome. you were chiefay of staff to the president as well. all those jobs serve you well as secretary of the treasury because of what that job entails. there'sld say that nothing i've done that hasn't been helpful in preparing me. there are still great challenges in this job. of thebination familiarity with the details of federal government that you learn, the managing decisions across complicated organizations , and understanding the political frame in which it happens is all very good training. treasury is a special place and it has been a great honor to be secretary the past year. >> do you believe budgets reflect values? >> i do. when you make decisions with constrained resources, you're fundamentally deciding it cannot have everything, what is most important. i believe the hardest decision

in budgeting is not choosing between good and bad things. the hard thing in budgeting is when you cannot have all the things you want, which ones are most important? it is making those decisions correctly in a way that reflects your values and bills a foundation for the future that is really the challenge. >> do you believe the present budget have reflects the values that you and the president have? >> i think that in a constrained world, we are making progress. world, i wouldd just point out that in the newest appropriations bill that passed a few weeks ago, tough in in there wered some important things. some money to get early childhood educations programs going, to get to manufacturing higher education, there

was funding for transportation department for the economy of the future. are there more things we need to do? absolutely. there's so much we could do if we were able to reach more political consensus on things like infrastructure, like early childhood education, skills training. reaching a work on compromise and places where you can. in the last couple of months there has been an encouraging turn in a more positive direction. congress passed a budget in december. you saw congress passed an appropriations bill in january. >> we just saw the house passed the debt ceiling limit. >> in between had a farm bill that had been locked up for years in disagreement, and just yesterday the debt ceiling past house and that takes away the threat of a self-inflicted wound , which would have only hurt our

economy. so i am an optimist. i think that you have a couple of months where you see the benefit of making decisions, working to get things done. there is more we can do. in almost four years, working on these issues, i think it is fair to say that republicans and democrats alike want to build a better country and invest more, and have a conversation about how to do it. it is a time to invest in our future, but we're not doing it way we should. >> i agree that we're not investing as much as we should. i think this would be a time where we would be wise to be putting resources into the things were going to need to be a vibrant economy for the rest of the 21st century. when i talk to ceo's as i go around the country, the two things i hear from them, the questions they ask when they

decide whether to invest in the united states is will there be infrastructure to get what we need in and out of our factories, and will we have the workforce we need, not just today but 5, 10, 20 years from today, to fill the jobs that we need to be filled? i think the answer to both those questions is yes in many cases. we have abundant energy resources that are making the cost of living cheaper. we have to make sure the answer is five years from now and 10 years from now. we know we don't have the infrastructure, the roads and the ports and airports that were going to need. goodow that we could use jobs to build those things now. we're very much going to try to get more investment in those areas. thekills training, it is human capital side of the equation. particularly in an economy that is increasingly defined by technology driving things very fast and very hard. we know that you need people

with the skills in order to grow need themy, and you skills to advance in this economy. which is why everything from early childhood education to graduate education, skills training at community college and four-year colleges in the middle, is critical to our future. do.es, we have more to these are areas where we ought to be able to still make more progress. larry sink was here last night, manages more money than anyone else, up to $4 trillion arelack rock. he said there the energy discoveries that we america's private sector is sitting on a lot of money to invest in their own cash accounts. we now seem to have a regulatory structure in place that will allow banks to really play a significant role. do you agree with that? itemsould add a couple of , but let me speak to those

three and maybe add one or two. i think the transformation of energy resources in this country over the last five years, 10 years, is nothing short of a revolution in both the availability of domestic resources that are cheap and make us more competitive in the world. so we have security and competitive advantage. that the talents of the future is to make sure we continue to use those resources and do it in an environmentally conscious way, to use them to keep growing our economy. i think on the regulatory side, we work very hard to get to clarity and finality, that some of the issues coming out of the financial crisis, we finalize the volcker rule at the end of last year and we have rules that are about to be final in some very important areas, which leaves you with financial institutions that have more security and stability. they have more capital so they and able to bear

their own risk. we have done things like the volcker rule that reduce the amount of risk. there are challenges in the future and we should focus on them, but i do think we have a great war deal of certainty than we had even a year ago. >> before corporations make the kind investments that would bring on more jobs in new plant capacity in that kind of thing. >> i would add to that list, we have a resilient economy and workforce. we responded to the financial 2008-2009 with the withof determination things like the recovery act that have put people to work and build things that we need for this country. some of the infrastructure we were talking about. we responded with the dodd-frank

act. without a head start over the rest of the world in getting our financial institutions straightened out. are people never give up. it was important this week and through the boats on the debt limit with very little drama, we are seeing government not putting a burden on the economy that makes it harder for the american people. self-inflicted wounds of the last few years have slowed down some of the economic recovery just as it was taking off. i'm least that we are not seeing that. >> what do you think changed? >> i think first of all, you go through an experience the government shutdown and the crisis over the debt limit in october -- >> do you think speaker boehner took lessons from that? >> i took to heart that there didn't haveers that a lot of anxiety for the u.s. on

the whole. it is politically challenging and difficult to do. the government often requires doing things that are politically challenging and hard to do. i think getting there in a way that leaves the economy in a place that continues to gain momentum, we have had some economic statistics that go one way or the other, but the trajectory over the last six in as has undeniably been positive direction. >> including jobs? someere have been confusing cross signals, but the trend, 8.5 million private sector jobs in the country. last month we have seen manufacturing and construction strong. i would love to see consistently high jobs numbers every month, but the trend is still in the right direction. we still have a lot more to do. until we have an economy where everyone who wants to work and and a full-time job,

we will keep at it. but we are making progress. the important thing about not having self-inflicted wounds is, the economy needs to build up some momentum and needs to have a head of steam. we have had some economic statistics that people are asking questions about, but we have a consensus that the economy is still growing at a healthy rate. >> there is also this. people look at the economy and where it's going. what is your assumption in terms of growth rates for 2013-2014? 2013, we know the fourth order in just wrong. the second half of the year ended strong, and that is where we begin 2014. what is the trajectory over the year? we will put out a budget in just a few weeks with specific assumptions.

i think it is fair to say that when we look at things like blue chip economics and things are hovering at a rate that shows hitting her going just beyond 3%, those are the kinds of numbers we are looking at. i think the challenge is going to be to make sure we do everything we can to encourage that growth to continue. making sure that we do the regular business the way this week appears we're going to be doing is important. if we could make some of those investments it would be very much helpful. it would be a good shot in the arm to the economy and it would help in building the future. manufacturing, in housing we have seen values come back in a lot of housing markets. we have seen construction growing, but not as rapidly as

we would like. that is an opportunity to do better yet. we have not seen the limit of how much improvement we can get. i think there are going to be ups and downs in the numbers. i spent the better part of three decades advising other policymakers not to react to dramatically to weekly or monthly statistics. look at the trend. >> there are also people who look at the u.s. economy, and i know you are aware of this, and ofn before the recession 2008, and say there were some fundamental issues there that were problems that may prevent this economy unless it changes to go back to that kind of full employment that we had. >> i think it is very fair to say that going into the financial crisis there were challenges in our economy in technological change, structural weaknesses. then we had this once in a generation financial crisis

where it's the worst economic , whichof my lifetime exaggerated how bad it was. sometimes you go through an economic crisis and the question is do you completely catch up? do you make up for the lost ground? >> will we? >> at think we need to make sure that we do what we have to to make sure that workers, young people have the skills they need in the modern economy. if we maker part, sure rebuilding the infrastructure, training workers, we're running our economic policy in a way that gives people confidence that there is stable and predictable certainty, i think we can pull through this and make up for the lost ground. ask we can't do it just for the kind of executive orders that

the president talked about his state of the union when he talked about the kind of action we could take. that a large doubt policy decision that our country major legislation, that is our system and that is why the president has proposals for legislative programs in a lot of these areas. take infrastructure, there is a great deal we need to do. in the appropriations bill that passed for several hundred million dollars for infrastructure spending. we are now in a position to make what are called tiger grants that will really create jobs and more of a foundation for economic growth in communities around the country. there is money in the appropriation bill to build manufacturing centers. we have a couple of them already set up. i visited 12 weeks ago. it's quite exciting to see ceos of companies and educators

coming together to help make the breakthroughs to do better manufacturing and train the workers to have skills for the jobs, and then to attract investment to the area. if we are able to get a political consensus to do more, it would be better. i'm not challenging the thesis. >> is there any reason to believe the political consensus is possible now, based on indications we have seen so far in the last several? >> i tend to be an optimist, charlie, as you know. if you look at the last couple of months, it gives a reason to be optimistic. agreement, abudget farm bill, passed to get through the debt limit in a way that is more businesslike and without a lot of disruption, in my experience, infrastructure is not traditionally a partisan issue. it doesn't matter if your democrat or republican.

i think there is broad bipartisan support for making sure that we have the roads in the ports that we need in this country. if you look at the water resources bill that passed the house with over 400 votes, the challenge is putting the consensus together. if we can break through the gridlock that makes it challenging to have conversations, regular order actually matters. congress worked through, and i'm not going to say it was the biggest budget agreement of all time, but it was very important to be able to do the business of governing. so i do take optimism from a series of actions which showed like looking at an issue immigration reform, that is good for our economy and there is a path forward. pathu think there is a forward on immigration reform in this congress? >> i actually do. >> even though speaker banner said it is impossible, and he

blamed the president as the reason it's impossible? the substanceat of immigration reform, there is broad agreement that there are policy areas where there could be consensus. there is broad agreement on both sides. >> when they're getting ready to go into midterm elections, that is the political reality. >> i leave it for others to make their own political decisions. i would personally argued this is a case where good policies and politics ultimately come together, which is one of the reasons why i'm more optimistic. the conversation is by no means over. the challenge of doing hard things is to keep at it. you cannot take every momentary setback as being a reason to stop. you have to keep pushing forward. >> how much damage do you think was done because of what the president said about if you want the health care plan you have

now come you will not have to change it. how much damage do you think that did to the president's credibility and to the country's attitude about health care, once they saw the reality of that and once they saw the obvious technical issues that were taking place at healthcare.gov? >> a think the president has been clear that there were problems in the rollout of healthcare.gov. >> that is content. thee're getting beyond technical problems of the rollout. people are seeing the choices they have clearly and i think they are going to like the choices they have as they understand them. that will ultimately be the test , not what people said two or four years ago. ♪

>> there's clearly a partisan difference, they did not want to be clouded by immigration discussions. >> i think i'm comfortable making the case to a family that is arty benefiting from the kind of security be affordable care act provides.

suffered a childhood disease in the family, provision that they would have health care in the future -- that's a big deal. >> what do you make of the senate refusal to extend unemployment benefits? >> i hope we're not done with this debate. unemployment benefits are very important. if you look at the unemployment statistics, we have seen the kind of splitting of the roads where the short-term unemployment rate is approaching historical levels in the unemployment rate is staying quite high. it is not because people don't want to work. there are all kinds of complicated reasons that once you are out of the work force for more than a couple of weeks or a couple of months, it's harder to get back in. people are trying to find a job in an economy where it is still challenging for them to find a job. have extended

benefits. >> do you believe we can get back to full employment that existed before 2008? can we get there, and how long? resistgoing to have to trying to predict how long, but i think we are going to see the kind of recovery that gets us back to a place where people who are looking for work can find work. i think it's going to require that extra effort, both in terms of giving people chances, but also making sure they have the skills we need. if the job you had is a job that's no longer available, we need to make sure you can get the skills for the jobs that are available in >> that takes an investment in the future. some of it requires new and some of it requires -- i just told you the story about manufacturing. we have a lot of resources in this country to match people together.

if you have a community college i canhave a factory, if talk to you in a place were you understand what i need, i think people would sign up for that significant program. we are seeing that work where we do it that way. i saw it in virginia just two weeks ago. i think we can make progress there. there is no doubt that there will be challenges in the economy going forward. we get great benefits from technology in terms of services and information that are available. we see economic growth coming from it. we also see a change in the nature of what jobs the economy has. >> it was interesting that rents while holland -- francois had a state dinner in washington which i think you attended, and now he is out in silicon valley. will we be able to maintain the kind of lead in technology when we see what's happening around

the world? >> when you look at what the strength of our economy has been over our history, it has been entrepreneurship, it has been breakthrough discoveries. quick scan other countries achieve that? -- quick scan other countries achieve that? provides local economy opportunities for american companies to meet the demand of a growing economy. >> i don't inc. we have a monopoly in this but we have a distinct advantage. we have the best universities in the world. of risk-takingry which is what you need to have in order to make these breakthroughs. i think that is reason to be very hopeful about the american economy. we have to do our part and make sure we continue to advance. at some of the rankings of education, we are not at the top of the list.

--people come here >> we have immigration rules that make them go back to the country of origin after they have gotten the education. >> i think we need to do immigration reforms. i'm not going to argue with you on that principle. >> when we deal with immigration withm, we will be dealing multiple issues. i think it's very difficult to break them apart and deal just with the high skilled worker issue and not see border issue. the truth is even a border issues have to do with how we continue to be a strong and vibrant economy. when i look at the technology sector, i see a lot of information in this country, icy see startups that are able to get capital, ideals that are able to take hold and spread around the world. i'm optimistic there will continue to be leaders in that area.

>> i want to get to china. with financialy reform in this country and dodd-frank, we mentioned that at the beginning. does this mean that two big to fail is no longer a problem in america, as it was in the 2008 crisis? >> if you look at our financial regulatory system and the condition of our financial institutions and compare 2008 to now, there is a world of difference. action,taken decisive we have a better capitalized set of financial institutions. we have rules in place that govern what happens if an institution fails. we actually have visibility into the largest financial institutions. they have living wills that say this is what happens if we fail.

the burden is borne by the shareholders and not by the public. we have resolution rules with something called a single point of entry, which now the world is copping to figure out how to do it. >> but the challenges remain. >> the question you have that thefrequently asked, question is have we made dramatic changes? the answer to that is unequivocally yes. are there no other threats? we still have challenges out there. shadow banking and cross-border resolution. we have regulated institutions in the u.s. and around the world are becoming more closely supervised. there has been a shift to resources in institutions that are outside of traditional banking world.

which isn't a bad thing in and of itself. unless the risk there grows to -- it in that if itself creates the risk of a systemic problem. we have work to do in the united states and internationally. one of the things we saw was, it wasn't enough to say can we resolve an institution in the united states, but what happens overseas? we have made progress on both of those issues but we have more to do. a high standard around the world. arbitrage't want where you see the highly regulated markets putting the rest of the world at risk. i think we've made great progress. we have way more progress to make an international space. we have seen progress on issues

like capital and leverage rules. the world met just a few weeks ago and adopted standards similar to the one our regulators wrote. that is a good thing. we want to have harmonize goals at a high level. high on my agenda for this year at the g 20 is to bring these fores to the table and discussion in places like the g 20 where countries come together to reach agreement on high standards. fore you more optimistic the global economy today, taking into account europe and china and brazil? >> early were going to see more .rowth the most recent global economic review shows we will see more growth than in recent years. i see pockets where policy could

actually increase the growth and that something are very much focused on. that's one of the things we do when we come to these meetings, we urge our friends around the world to do things to help drive global growth. if you look at the world economy, the u.s. cannot grow at a rate fast enough to pull the whole world along. the difference between 3% and 3.5% makes a world of difference in the united states, but it's not enough to make up for losing a percent in europe or china or japan. you have to look at these major parts of the world economy and say what can they do to grow more? europe,ve been clear in the countries that have surpluses could do more to stimulate growth and demand. the world needs more demand. in japan we have seen for the first time in almost two decades , policies that have brought the economy out of deflation and it's growing, but that the need to make the kinds of reforms

that make the future growth. china has to reform its growth and i think they know they have to record -- reform the economy. >> clearly they want to make it more market oriented. they say they want to have more competition with the public sector, with capitalism. >> i was in china a couple of times last year and i was there just days after their plenum completed, so i had a chance to talk to them before any other world figure came through in a one-on-one conversation. premiererpart, the vice , and the economic team. signalserstand that the of the need for market reform are all around.

they have inventory that isn't being sold for state owned enterprise. they have excess capacity in real estate. all of the obvious signs that they need more market forces in order for the economy to grow. they know they need more consumer demand and a stronger safety net so people don't feel like they have to save so much, that demand is out of their reach. how fast they make those changes is a separate question. >> they have been committed to the idea of turning from an export economy to a consumer demand economy within their own country for several years. a i think you have seen change, though, even in the last year. statements that have been made. there has been quite a bit of detail in terms of the need to have competition in financial markets, the need to move toward market determined exchange rates

, the need to have the allocation of capital be a market determining condition. they worry about the disruption it comes as you move from a very controlled economy to a more market-driven economy. as you look at the rate of growth in china, some of the reforms may mean sacrificing a little bit of short-term growth as they go through the adjustment. they need to cap the adjustment, but the disruption may cause some friction. so the pace of change is something we will have to keep pressing on. we have good conversations on this. >> so there are two questions that come out of that. in your judgment, is there a sense that to truly have the kind of economic reform they have, i may need political reform? >> i think they have the ability to make decisions in their system. is one of the things that for years --

i think that as you look at the changes in china, they are not all towards more openness and freedom. there are some areas you see them close down in terms of security. , think on the economic issues they know that they have a population that's moving into the cities. they need to have some security. i think they know they need to start making decisions and maybe tomorrow -- open their markets to competition. >> clearly cyber security is a big issue and there are conversations with china, i'm sure you are talking about that. >> cyber security and cyber theft are somewhat different issues. it's important to distinguish them. the issue we have raised the china is really the protection of intellectual property.

theftes where there is a of intellectual property are just unacceptable for a country that wants to sit at the table and make the rules for the world. china sees it self as a country that should have a voice in making the rules for the next generation. they cannot have it both ways. >> that was put together by former deputy secretary of the treasury, saying if you want to be part of the global committee, you have to take responsibility to be part of the global community. had they accepted that, in your opinion? >> i think they have a clear understanding that's going to be necessary. we will continue to press on the issue. i think they very much want to have that kind of voice in the world economy and in making the rules. >> you don't seem convinced that they have accepted the idea that with responsibility brings a sense of commitment to a kind of international code.

>> i think there is an understanding, i do believe there is a commitment and i have not yet seen the sequence of events that will give us confidence it's happening. that is why say we need to keep pushing. >> how long was your meeting? >> about 10 hours. >> was there something that you wanted to immediately call the president and say, you wouldn't believe what i just heard. was there anything that made you say wow, this adds to, changes, alters, confirms my expectation of new leadership in china? >> this was not my first meeting with him. >> but this was the first one after the plenum. >> i suspect that what he said as all of us prepare for something that's a big deal, we are thinking about what we said

at that meeting. something similar to what was said at the plenum. i heard kind of a narrative of chinese history. it was really interesting. meaning you have to understand our history to understand where we are and where we might want to go? >> more that we have to make change in a way that we understand our history. is ae still a country that communist country that is accepting market conditions for the future of the economy, and to reconcile the two, and the changes going to be to frame where the two can be harmonious him as opposed to where it will move from our past to a new future. it's going to be an arc, not jumping over. i thought it was an interesting economicing together and political philosophy ideas

in a way that probably deeply reflects the context of chinese thought. >> what is their assessment of the relationship with the united states today? valuehink they very much the high-level contact with the united states. i was really struck when i went there soon after becoming secretary and then again after the plenum that on relatively short notice, they open the doors to meetings with the president and vice premier, the major leaders in the country. it's important to them to have a relationship and a conversation. a long list of things we are concerned about. it's not like my half of the conversation is just listening. i think it helps them to hear us. to learn they want from our experience and adopt what works in the context of their economy and their society.

assume currency was at the top of your list. >> always high on the list. >> has there been a change the re? >> we have seen progress in terms of the exchange rate gap flows in. we pressed and pressed that they need to make more progress. should be a change in the dollar as the world reserve currency? picks i'm not sure that i heard that exactly. i think they have a positive the renminbi to be the world currency. you cannot become a true world currency if you don't -- i think they're on a path and making out ass tom a but we put currency report twice a year and we are very direct in terms of

pointing to interventions that we think are problematic. they are aware of how sensitive an issue it is, both to united states and other countries of the world. i think they are making progress, but we need to keep pressing on them to make more progress. quick so you left the meeting thinking what is the biggest gap between china and the united states? >> on the economic issues, not i thinkerly optimistic, we are pushing on an open door in terms of the direction we are encouraging them to go. they have a different view of time than we do. we're going to find it frustrating how slow the progress he is. they need to understand that in order for this relationship to ofy strong in the context both the u.s. economy and public opinion, they are going to need to show their progress in terms that are a little bit faster. x many people will say that we have to prepare for that. in other words, it's important on the part of the leaders of

this country to look at the jamie -- changing dynamics in .hina >> depending on whether you look , is thee as a group third-largest economy. country. country, it's the second-largest economy. we will be the two largest economies in the world. maybe our growth will determine the health of the world economy along with europe and japan. which is why we all have to look at ways to increase demand and growth on the work together and lower the barriers for trade and raise the standards so we are doing business in a way that improves the environment, instead of the opposite. >> thinking of brazil and emerging nations, what is the future of their economy in the near term? brazil, at turkey, india -- >> you have to look at them individually. what we have seen in the last months is a little

differentiation between countries that have taken tough policy decisions and have fiscal policies and structural reforms in their markets. >> who would that be? >> i would rather not name names. if you look at the pool -- performance of currency and performance in the market, there is a real differentiation in the countries that have taken tough decisions -- >> would you put us on one of those that have taken the tough decisions in terms of financial regulation? >> in terms of our fiscal consolidation, we have done more in the short run than we should have. i think we have done well in terms of our banking reforms. we have been at the aggressive end of the world to get our financial house in order. we continue to be a leader in the world on important issues. if you look at the emerging ofkets, there are a number video syncretic things that are creating local problems. not a moment that looks to

be systemically. we have to keep our eye on it. i'm mindful of the fact that in past financial crises, things started where people did not expect it. i talked to my counterparts in emerging economies in all countries in the imf. people are watching it carefully. what i am expressing reflects a broadly held view. >> has the economic recovery from the 2008 recession progressed as much as you expected it to by this time around the world? >> i actually thought about this a lot in 2008-2009. i thought at the time there would be a long, slow recovery because of the nature of the recession, the history of financial recessions is that

they are long, slow recoveries. i think what we didn't know then is exactly how deep it was. we only found out when the statistics got revised a couple of years later that the whole was even deeper could be >> and how fragile the economy was. grace given how bad things were in 2008-2000 nine, we probably shouldn't be surprised, but it actually was worse than we knew at the time. so it probably is a little disappointing that it has taken this long. to compare where we were then to now, we have made a lot of progress. if somebody had sat down in 2009 in toad you that our unemployment rate, as tough as it is to still have that unemployment rate, that it would be down to that, we would have thought that was an aggressive projection. rates, we arewth struggling to get to 3%, but hopeful of crossing 3%.

it is not enough, but it is substantial. >> what is your commitment to entitlement reform in this administration? >> the president has spoken to that clearly over a number of years. he has put forward several times the idea that we need to do social security reform and a balance, fairway. there hasn't been an environment to have that conversation. look at his budgets over the last two years, he has made it clear that tax reform and entitlement reform need to move together. >> what is he doing about tax reform? business taxrate reform from individual tax reform, they are very different. tax reform is intrinsically tied to a larger question. what the president has put let's doas to say that business tax reform, lower our statutory rate, use the one-time revenues you get to finance

infrastructure binning and things like skills training. i still think that is something we should push hard on. when i talk republicans, i'm encouraged to keep talking about it. i think there is potential there. it is obviously something that is not ready to happen stay or tomorrow, but it is an idea we will keep pushing. >> you work with tip o'neill. you work on wall street. you work with bill clinton, and now you work for and with barack obama. how is he different? x i've had the privilege to work with some of the really great leaders of my lifetime, and each one is their own person and has their own style. i've always been reluctant to compare them. the argument goes this way, as you know. you were right there at the center of everything and you understood it. when the argument is made that

we were seen to make some progress in ration -- relationships between republican , is the president committed to doing more because he believe somehow that this is the right opportunity to try to do what he wanted to do when he came to washington, achieve a level of bipartisanship? or is it too late? >> the president has tried from the beginning to reach out and work with both sides. even in health care reform, there are ideas that started out as republican ideas that he incorporated through the way he approached it. throughout his presidency, he has been open to good ideas from wherever they come. intellectan enormous and intellectual syria city to every issue he addresses. he really doesn't care where the

.ood idea comes from we have been a challenge global environment. it hasn't been the ripest moment for the kind of direct negotiations that worked in the 80's and 90's. a little bit better than they work right now. i'm not going to cast lame, but i will just say -- theou have suggested biggest problem facing the country was washington. bob gates said the same thing. the issues having to do within in two-mile area there washington dc, with the conflict between republicans and democrats is the heart of our global position. but the president tried to engage directly on many occasions. the budget negotiations that i was deeply involved in, he was willing to do things that would have been hard to come back and convince democrats to go along with. you need to have a negotiating the comparable

ability to go back and negotiate and make things happen. maybe he just wasn't the right time for it. it was never his interest or will. one of the things in the stories that people tell about whether there is out return on, the president picks up the phone and talks to people. on a very regular basis. issue.'s not the >> you could spend all day on the phone, and if the environment is not ready, is not going to produce a different result. >> you also acknowledge that human relations make a difference in whether democrats in the senate or republicans in the house, they are in fact people who are subject to the same kind of ego and other issues that might affect how they perceive issues. >> one thing i think is true is people are people where ever they are, whether in the

legislature or the white house or the business world or university or in media. i think when people deal with the president, they see that he listens to them. he shows it not just by his interaction but with the highest form of flattery, but by taking their ideas and moving forward with them. the record shows we have done quite a bit working with congress over the last five years. we have three years left to do quite a lot more. learnedhe things i've in 3.5 decades in this world is the times you live in always feel like the most partisan times ever. then when you look back, you see the things you accomplished and the kind of jump out of the noise of the day. in the 80's it didn't feel like the spirit of bipartisanship. >> tip o'neill and ronald reagan and all that. there is a lot of romanticism

remembering the 80's. i remember when losing a few dozen democrats, lost control of the house floor and the reagan program went to congress. thatwas difference is speaker o'neill did not tie the congress up in knots. he let the process go forward with the confidence that in the end, it would come back to his benefit, as it did just a couple of years later when we were able to start negotiating. there were some pretty tough words going back and forth between the white house and congress in those days, and certainly in the 90's. we have come out of the worst depression since -- worst recession since the great depression. we have seen the affordable care act enacted and now it's being implemented, changing policy in a way that affects every american's life. every day we are doing more. i am bullish on our opportunity to do more and when people look

back, they will say boy, they got a lot done. >> you are welcome at the table any time. >> it was a pleasure to be here, charlie. >> thank you for joining us. see you next time. ♪

.

>> this is taking stock. posted a profit of $2 billion. that exceeded analyst estimates. the banker is here with the chief executive to give us more details. betty? wax great to see you in the studio. strong quarter.