it as basically as dismantling of iran's nuclear program. we're not dismantling any centrifuges, any equipment. we're simply not producing, not enriching over 5%. they're telling us and the world this interim deal they're not dismantling a damn thing. president rohany, the new moderate -- if you believe that, i've got property to sell you. said on ?b cnn -- cnn there will be no destruction of centrifuges. no, no, not at all. if you believe as i they should be out of the enrichment business all the centrifuges should be destroyed because to allow this regime to continue to enrich i think is dangerous and quite, frankly, will lead to a military conflict between israel and iran and maybe others. president rohany tweeted our

relationship with the world is based on iran's nation's interests and the geneva agreement world powers surrendered to iran's national will. maybe that's bluster. when you look at the evidence not so much bluster. the foreign minister said interconnection between networks of centrifuges that have been used to enrich uranium to 20% so they can enrich only to 5%. these interconnections can be removed in a day and connected again in day. he's basically saying all we've done is basically pulled the plug and we'll put it back in if we need to. here's what's happened since the interim deal. president roo toonie -- rouhani declared we have struck the first blow in the field of insurance, shipping, the banking system, foodstuffs, medicine, exports of petrochemical materials. he tweeted you're a witness to how foreign firms are visiting

our country. 117 political delegations have come here. france, turkey, georgia, ireland, tunisia, kazakhstan, china, italy, india, australia a and indeed sweeden. the french chamber of commerce led a delegation with the head of the mitch alynn -- militia alynn tire company. they're not going to violate the sanctions but they do believe after this interim deal the smart money is that the sanctions are behind us. the international monetary fund predicted iran's economy could turn around due to the interim agreement agreement. listen to this. the economy in iran that was crippled because of sanctions could turn around based on the interim agreement that doesn't dis3457b8 or remove -- dismantle or remove anything. prospects for 2014 and 2015 have improved with the interim p-5 plus one agreement. real g.d.p. growing by 1% to

322% in twownch and -- 2014 and 2015, inflation decline 20%. india's imports of oil doubled from a month earlier. china has emerged as iran's top trading partner with nonoil trade hitting $13 billion over the last 10 months. u.s. aerospace companies are seeking permission to sell parts to iran for the first time in three decades. iran has signed a deal to sell iraq arms and ammunition worth $159 million according to doctors season by reuters, 13 major international international companies aim to reenter the marketplace over the next several months. the sanctions my friends on the other side are crumbling. if we do not reset what is going on, the leverage we've gained is being lost, we're marching toward a disaster, having a new round of sanctions passed by congress would tell the international community from our

point of view this is not behind us, we're not going to take the pressure off until we get a result that makes our country safe and our allies in the region, particularly israel. if we do not act now, it will be too late. and to our friends at the white house, when you threaten to veto legislation and you accuse people who want to impose sanctions if the deal fails as going to war, i'm afraid you've completely misunderstand the situation as it really exists. i'm willing to give you credit for imposing the sanctions in a forceful way but you're naive and dangerous in your thought process that we can now negotiate with the sangdz crumbling and -- sanctions crumbling and get the right answer. the iranian monetary unit, the rial has appreciated by over 25%. the iranian economy is rebounding after the interim

deal. they're back in business, inflation is down, the value of their currency is up, people are lining up to do business in iran, the sanctions are crumbling, and the u.s. senate sits quiet. so all i can say is that we have a chance to turn this around before it's too late. i believe that the best thing we could do as a bead is for republicans and democrats to pass a new round of sanctions would that would only take place at the end of the six-month period if a final deal doesn't -- is not achieved that results in the things i've outlined. the bipartisan sanction bill reinforces the end game of basically dismantling the ability of the iranians to develop a nuclear weapon. we have specific language in the sanctions bill that would get us to a good outcome. i am afraid by the time the six

months is up, the economy in iran will have rebounded, the will of the international community to go through this process again will have been lost. and right now the smart money is that iran is a place you can soon do business, the sanctions are history, and our european allies i'm afraid will accept a deal with the iranians that is not in our national interest and certainly not be good for our allies. i am very worried that the p-5 plus one has already conceded in their own mind some enrichment capability in the hands of the iranian regime for the purpose of face saving, supposedly. we should not worry about allowing the iranians to save face, given what they've done to our soldiers in iraq, the amount of terrorism they've spread spread throughout the world and the way they've behaved. i'm not in the face saving

business when it comes to iran. i'm in protecting america's national security interest business and i don't mind the iranians have a nuclear power plan for peaceful purposes as long as you control the fuel cycle but if they want more than that, that tells you all you need to know about what their ambitions are. to my colleagues on the other side, if you allow any enrichment capability left in the hands of the shia persians in iran, the sunni arabs are going to insist on like capability. and i'm here to tell you that if you want to turn the middle east into the ultimate powder keg, allow the iranians to have an enrichment program because every sunni arab nation who can afford one will want like -- want a like program. if you think you can allow the

iranians to enrich uranium and the sunni arabs will sit on the sidelines and do nothing, you don't understand the middle east. and if you want to set the world on the road to armageddon, that will be the end of nonproliferation in the middle east. the interim deal is a bad deal for the world according to the prime minister, and a great deal for iran, the prime minister of israel, he is right. if this administration is contemplating a final agreement that does not remove all the highly enriched uranium in iran consistent with the u.n. resolution it's making a mistake for the ages. if this administration is going to sign on to a deal that allows enrichment to continue in iran where they now have a class of centrifuges that can take less than 5% uranium and spin it up to 90%, that will be a mistake for the ages. this is north korea in the making. but unlike north korea, where

they eventually went nuclear after the international community through inspeksz and sanctions tried to stop their program, japan and south korea have yet to feel the need to obtain a nuclear weapon to counter the north koreans. i can assure you that the sunni arab nations in the middle east will not put themselves in that position. and all you have to do is ask them. i challenge every member of this body to get on the phone and call up the major sunni arab states and ask them a simple question, if the iranians are allowed to enrich, will you insist on the same right? see what they tell you. so we have a chance here if we're smart to reset the table before the sanctions completely crumble and they are. if you think you can wait six months, have them completely crumble and reimpose sanctions, you're kidding yourself because

the world is not going to go down that road. now, what will happen if this negotiation with iran fails to deliver what i think is the right outcome, a peaceful nuclear power program without any kip capability to make a nuclear weapon. i think the people throughout the region are going to respond forcefully and in kind. i think our friends in israel and the world -- are in a world of hurt. can israel tolerate the ayatollahs in iran having the ability to develop a nuclear weapon and the only thing between the state of israel's security is a bunch of u.n. inspectors? now, think about that. swine flu put america -- would you put america's national security at risk, the only thing between as hostile nation

threatening to wipe us off the map and success is a bunch of u.n. inspectors? how well did that work out in north korea? that is not a viable outcome. we have to stop this program completely. it must be dismantled, not moth bald. it has to be -- mothballed. if iranians want a pure plant for peaceful purposes they can have one as long as somebody controls the fuel cycle. we're headed toward a disaster if we don't act pretty quickly. i don't mean to be so dire, but look at the middle east. look at the syrian effort to contain the syrian chemical weapons program. these thuggish regimes are not going to turn over the advantages they have until the regime itself is threatened. i believe the iranians after

syria do not believe any more that our country has the will to use military force as a last resort to stop their nuclear program. no matter what president obama says, his actions speak far louder than his words. we could change things if the congress would impose new sanctions, bipartisan in nature, that would actually allow the administration some leverage they don't have today. so the reason the bipartisan bill is in the burr alternative to the sanders bill is that many of us have -- believe now that time is not on our side, and to my friends on the other side, i hate the fact that we have now split on what to do about iran and how to impose sanctions. i've enjoyed as much as anything in the entire time in the senate working with my democrat and republican colleagues to craft policies designed to get the right answer when it comes to the iranian nuclear threat. we are now in a different spot.

as much as i hate it, i feel compelled from my point of view to use every opportunity this body presents to bring the issue up. if you do not believe the sanctions are crumbling, i would love to hear your explanation as to why they're still working, given the information that's overwhelming. so i hope in the coming days we can regain that bipartisanship. the majority leader several months ago promised a vote on iran sanctions if we could find a bipartisan bill. he made that promise. and i will quote that later in the week. what's happened between then and now is the president has weighed in, he's tried to lock his party down, and he's threatened to veto this sanctions bill. now is not the time to turn sentence over to the obama administration who does not have a very good track record when it comes to policing the middle east. actually we're helping them whether they believe it or not.

the last thing i want is a conflict anywhere in the world that can be avoided. but here's our choices -- if the negotiations fail, israel will not stand for a nuclear-capable iran. if you attack iran, you open pandora's box. many bad things can happen. but i can tell you this, if there's a war between us and iran, they lose, we win. this is not much of a debate militarily. but it's always a terrible thing to go to war unless you absolutely have to. so if the iranians believe that we're serious about sanctions, and we're serious about using military force as a last resort 3, we may still actually get the right answer. if they don't believe that, we're putting israel and our allies in a terrible spot.

if the iranian program survives these negotiations, and they march towards a nuclear weapon like the north koreans did, if the u.n. inspections fail and they achieve their goal of a nuclear weapon, then you've eied pandora's box because every sunni arab state will follow in kind, then only god knows what happens then. so we have a chance to avoid that. but but israel, my cheetion, will never stand for the proposition that the only thing between the ayatollahs having a nuclear weapon and the state of israel's survival is a bunch of u.n. inspectors traig to control a program -- trying to control a program with a lot of capability. sunni air be a states will not allow the iranians to enrich without them claiming an equal

right. all this can be avoided if we act decisively. but if we continue to wait and alloy the sanctions to -- allow the sanctions to crumble, god help us all. i yield. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from new york. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: i ask unanimous consent the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent the senate

proceed to the immediate consideration of calendar number 307, h.r. 2431. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 307, h.r. 2431, an act to reauthorize the national integrated drought information system. the presiding officer: without objection, the senate will proceed to the measure. mr. schumer: i further ask that the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. schumer: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that when the senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. on wednesday, february 26, that following the prayer and pledge, the morning business be deemed expired, the journal of proceedings be approved to date and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, that following any leader remarks, the senate be in a period of morning business for two hours, with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each, with the

time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with republicans controlling the first half, the majority controlling the final half, and that following morning business, the senate resume the motion to proceed to s. 1982, the veterans benefits bill postcloture. further, that all time during adjournment and morning business count postcloture on the motion to proceed to s. 1982. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. schumer: if there is no further business to come before the senate, i ask that it adjourn under the previous order. the presiding officer: the the presiding officer: the

>> attorney general, eric holder, spoke at the winter meeting of the national association of attorneys general today about the legal pacification based on sexual orientation. he also discussed the justice department's decision not to defend the defense of marriage act. here is more. >> in early 2011, the justice department attorneys would no longer defend section three of the of marriage act. as i've said before, this decision was not taken lightly. our actions are motivated by the strong belief that all measures that distinguish among people based on their sexual orientation must be subjected to a higher standard of scrutiny and this measure was unconstitutional discrimination. last summer, supreme court made a historic decision in united states versus windsor was

checking on the ban on recognizing gay and lesbian couples that are legally married. this is equal treatment and equal protection under the law vidmar recently and partly in response to the windsor decision, a number of state attorneys, including those in pennsylvania, nevada and last week in oregon have reached similar determinations after playing heightened scrutiny to laws in their states concerning same-sex marriage. any decisions at any level not to defend individual laws must be exceedingly rare. they must be reserved only for exceptional, truly exceptional circumstances and they must never stand from policy for political disagreements. henge against apple man firm constitutional ground. in general, i believe we must be suspicious of legal classifications based solely on sexual orientation i must

endeavor in all of our efforts to uphold and advance the values that once let our forebears who declared unequivocally that all are treated equal and entitled to equal opportunity. >> there was part of attorney general holder's remarks earlier today at the winter meeting of the national association of attorney general. you can see all of his comments tonight 8:00 eastern here on c-span2. >> on the next "washington journal," we look at the legislative agenda and strategy for the midterm elections with representative jim hines of connecticut.

>> what we are told, both at the students and nation in terms of popular imagination as there's all kinds of sitting in marches and demonstrations that occurred, but they are really kind by these famous iconic people. basically rosa parks who just was so tired that she refused to get up from the bus in montgomery, alabama and basically a young preacher who even the president referred to during the election as this young preacher from georgia, which is dr. martin luther king jr., who believed the masses of african-americans from racial oppression. this notion that rose is fat and martin could do this staff and iraq could fly, all of these things sound good, but they really -- they really simplify a much more complicated history.

that complicated history really an policy of many african-americans, women and men who proactively dismantle racial segregation, including rosa parks. this apparent didn't just refuse to give up her seat by accident. it was a concerted, strategic effort to try and transfer of demographic institution spare >> president obama announced today the creation of two major manufacturing hubs located in chicago and detroit. the public-private resources that the administration says will boost manufacturing and

help create more jobs. this is 20 minutes. [applause] >> hello, everybody. everybody, please have a seat. thank you. thank you very much. [cheers and applause] thank you. thank you so much. [applause] everybody please have a seat. welcome to the white house, everybody. we've got some pretty cool stuff appear. and we also have people here who could explain what it all is. but thank you so much for being here. we have got first and foremost some people who i am proud to call friends and have been fighting on behalf of the

american workers every single day. we've got the governor of the great state of illinois. pat quinn is in the house. [applause] we've got somebody who is responsible for training my trees and potholes in front of my house and shoveling snow. i haven't been back for a while. i don't know how it's going, but i assume he's handling his business. the mayor of the great city of chicago, rahm emmanuel. [applause] we've got phil lajoy, supervisor of township michigan who is here. there he is. good job, phil. and we've got some outstanding members of congress who are here, especially someone who just announced that this would be his last term in congress,

but if somebody who's so many of us have learned from and admired. he is a man who has every single day of his life and off-base, nature that he was fighting on behalf of the people who really needed help and he is going to be not just the longest-serving member of congress in american history, you're also one of the best. michigan so john dingell is here. [applause] we are better off because of john's surveys and we are going to miss him. now, today i am joined by

researchers who invent some of the most intense battles on the planet, designers who are modeling prototypes for the digital cloud, folks and the pentagon who helped to support their work. basically, i am here to announce that we are building iron man. [laughter] i am going to blast off in a second. [laughter] this has been a secret project we've been working on for a long time. not really. maybe. it's classified. [laughter] that keeping america on the cutting-edge of technology and innovation is what is going to ensure a steady string of good jobs into the 21st century and that is why we are here today to take new action, to put america

at the forefront of the 21st century manufacturing. this is a law that when our economy is growing and it has been growing steadily for over four years now. our businesses have created about 8.5 million new jobs over the past four years. the unemployment rate is the lowest it has been in over five years. our manufacturing sector is adding jobs for the first time since the 1990s. so there is some good news to report. but the trends that have battered the middle class for decades has become in some ways even starker. what those at the top are doing better than ever, average wages have barely budged. too many americans are working harder than ever just to keep up and it is our job to reverse those trends. we've got to build an economy that works for everyone. not just the fortunate few. we've got to restore opportunity for all people.

that's the essence of america. no matter who you are coming for you come from, what you look like, how you started out, if you are willing to work hard to take responsibility, you can get ahead in america. i've been talking now for months about an opportunity. let me break it down into four parts. more good jobs that pay good wages. jobs in america manufacturing, rebuilding our infrastructure, innovation, energy. number two, training workers the skills they need to fill those jobs. number three, guaranteed access to world-class education for every child in america. and number four, making sure the hard work pays off. with wages you can live on in savings you can retire and in health insurance when you need it. now i am looking forward to working with congress wherever they're willing to do something on his priorities.

the members of congress who are here all care deeply about these issues. let's face it. sometimes it's hard to get moving in congress. we've got a divided congress at this point. in the sphere of action, wherever it can act on my own to expand opportunity for more americans, i will seize the opportunity. that is why we are here today. already, my administration has launched two halves for high-tech manufacturing. one is in youngstown, ohio and is focused on 3-d printing, an entirely new way by which the manufacturing process can accelerate and supply chains get stitched together. and i create, design all the way through production in ways that can potentially be revolutionary. we've also focused on energy

efficient electronics in raleigh, north carolina. what happens at each of these has his can team-leading business is to research universities so they are able to ensure that america leads the world in the advanced technologies that make sure we are at the forefront when it comes to manufacturing. my friend, congressman tim ryan here today. i just saw him. there he is helped us get the first of these hubs of the ground. they are glowing bipartisan momentum behind these efforts. but by two republicans and two democrats. roy blunt and sherrod brown in the senate and tom reed and joe kennedy in the house that have written those two is a true network all across the country. i am really encouraging congress to pass these bills. they are good ideas and what

they do is not only help link upper top researchers at their best business people, but suddenly they become a focal point of opportunity and businesses around the country and the world start seeing if i am interested in digital technology, that's the place i should locate. if i'm interested in 3-d printing, let me go there. so you get a virtual site that can take place. congress has an opportunity to expand these in a significant way. in the meantime i'll congress decides what is going to do, we have to take action to launch more hugs this year and today we are announcing the next two advanced manufacturing companies. one is in the detroit area and the other is in chicago, illinois. [cheers and applause]

now, let me describe a little more why this is so important. for generations of americans coming manufacturing was the ticket to a good class life. we made staff and the stuff we make, like steel and cars and planes made as the economic leader of the world. the work was hired, but the jobs are good. if you caught on an assembly plant in detroit or in a steel plant in youngstown, you could buy a home. you could raise kids. you could send them to college. you could retire with some security. those jobs didn't just tell us how much we reverse. they told us how we were

contributing to the society and how we were helping to build america and gave people a sense of dignity and purpose. you know, they a boeing plane or one of the big three cars rolling off the assembly line, they said, you know what, i made that. and they were iconic. people understood that is what it meant for something to be made in america. now, advances in technology have allowed manufacturers to do more with less. local competition means a lot of good manufacturing jobs went overseas. bush is more competition. folks caught up to us and in some cases just copied what we were doing with lower reaches. so the competition was fierce. in 2000 about, we lost about one

third of all american manufacturing jobs in the middle class suffer for it. the good news is today or manufacturers have added more than 620,000 new manufacturing jobs over the last four years. that is the first sustained manufacturing growth in over 20 years. but the economy has changed. so what if we want to attract more good manufacturing jobs to america, we have got to make sure we are in the cutting-edge of new manufacturing techniques and technologies. i just have to emphasize here because you hear some people say, well, why are manufacturing jobs so special and this is a service economy. nobody believes we are going to duplicate all the manufacturing jobs that existed in the 40s and 50s because the economy

changed. you go to an auto plant now it's different than it was. fewer people make more cars. keep in mind for me is manufacturing in this country, what ends up happening is first of all, there are a whole lot of suppliers to those manufacturers. so that one plant may be deceptive. it doesn't tell you other companies across the country working on behalf of those manufacturers. the services provided to those manufacturers and the architects and designers and software engineers. all these things may not be counted as manufacturing, but vyas having this has as manufacturing, it is a ripple effect throughout the economy. so we've got to focus on advanced manufacturing to keep the manufacturing here in the united states. that is what is going to help get the next stark industries off the ground.

so today, by the way, my commerce secretary, penny pritzker, is not here because she is in silicon valley meeting with business leaders and talk about how together we can work to spur economic growth. the point is i don't want the next big job creating discovery to come from germany or china or japan. i wanted to be made here in america. one last point of going to make about this. typically, a lot of research and development wants to be co-located with where manufacturing is taking place. because if you design something, you want to see how it's working and getting made and tinker with it and fixed it and try something different. they thought the manufacturing somewhere else, the lead we've got in design and research and development, we will lose that

too. that will locate overseas that we will have lost what is the single most important thing about american economy and that is innovation. that is what all of these hubs are about. they are partnerships that bring together companies and universities to develop cutting-edge technology, train workers to use that technology and then make sure that the research is translated into real-world products made by american workers. so the first hub in michigan is going to focus on developing advanced lightweight materials. detroit has 30 helped lead the american comeback in manufacturing. since we stepped in to help automakers retool come to the american auto industry has created 425,000 new jobs. and diverted begun using new high spring steels to make cars that use less gas, save money, help save the planet, cars are still save because of these new

models. and that is just one example of incredible things new models can do. you see the same thing when it comes to armor troops. if you look at some of the new planes that l.a. manufacturing, they look later even though they had the same capacity. they use less fuel. wind turbines that generate more power and less cost. pathetic lives at how people walk who never thought they create. so we believe there is going to be an incredible demand for these battles, both from the military and from the private sector. we want to make sure they are made in america. we won our workers to have those jobs. that is at the first hub is going to do. focus on making these cool metals. second hub, based in chicago, but keep in mind there is a consortium more than four

companies, 22 universities, labs like northwestern and university of illinois. nearly 200 small businesses, and number of other states participating in this consortium. it is funded by $70 million award that the defense department, but the state and businesses raise 250 million private and a commitment to help when they stated they could have been. so this digital manufacturing and design innovation is going to be headquartered not far from downtown chicago and goose island or there's a very superior. [laughter] just letting you know. a little hometown plug here. feel free to use that, goose island. [laughter] and it's going to focus on using digital technology and data management to help manufacturers

turn ideas into real-world products faster and cheaper than before and it will include training to help more americans use the skills to do these digital manufacturing jobs. the country that gives new products to market faster and at less cost, they will win the race for the good jobs of tomorrow. if you look at what's happening in manufacturing, a lot of good is much more is a good. somebody's watching inventory flow. they want to respond to consumer demand faster. what that means is manufacturers who can adapt, retool, get something out, change for a particular spec will win the competition every time and we want that country that is specialized in nestor diaz, the united states of america. the suppliers to collaborate with customers in real-time test parts digitally, cut down on the time and money they spend

producing expensive prototypes. it is tailored to each individual consumer. we want troops to download digital blueprints they can use to repair equipment right there in the field. these are all ambitious goals. but this is america. that's where do. we are ambitious. we don't make small plans. that doesn't mean will make all this happen overnight. this stuff takes time. we also know these manufacturing hubs have the potential to fundamentally change the way we build things in america. so, 10 years from now, 20 years from now, imagine our workers manufacture materials that used to be science fiction. a sheet of metal better than paper but strong as steel or workers being able to design a project using materials entirely on a computer to bring to market

less money, selling all over the world. that is what the next generation of american manufacturing, click. to get there, we can't stop at just one of these hubs. the only problem is germany had 60 of them. germany has 60 of them. part of the reason germany has been able to take the lead in search and manufacturing areas is because they've been tested in these hubs and invest in the training of the workers for these very precise machines and tools that cuts into our market share when it comes to manufacturing around the world. so we can't let germany have six and us have for. we've got to do better. ..

if we stay focused on winning this race will make sure the next revolution in minute

ensuring is an american revolution command sure that opporunity is in the state of the usa. here in resolutions, everybody. good job. [applause] a job. [applause] [applause] [applause] >> attorney general eric : spoke today of the winter meeting of the national association of attorneys general about legal classifications based on sexual orientation. he also discussed the justice department decision not to offend the defense of marriage act. you did see his remarks and one hour at 8:00 eastern here on c-span2. earlier today jason berman, the chairman of the white house council of economic advisers

spoke at a policy conference held by the national association for business economics. discussed some of the upcoming proposals to be announced and the president's budget. here is more. >> first, and his body is your the president is writing his discretionary level to what was agreed upon in the ryan-murphy agreement. and one thing you see in those discretionary levels is just so hard and painful the choices are to write a budget to the global. for that reason in addition to writing a budget to that level, the president is also proposing on top of that and opporunity, grope command security initiative that would make additional investments, and for 2015 split between defense and non-defense perry's focusing on areas like basic research, really show the education, job training, and national-security

and financed with a balanced package of tax to cut tax loophole closures and spending roof over the next ten years. the president continues to look for ways to make even more to sustain investment in our productivity and one of the high as perris in that regard is our nation infrastructure. and the president will once again propose an ambitious multi-year infrastructure real opposition plan. at the same time and not waiting for congress to act. 2011 the president issued an executive order directing more transparency and accountability in the of the structure permanent part set about process, and in the weeks and months ahead we will be building on the progress to make sure process -- projects are getting started as quickly as possible.

one at the same time we're going to be pushing to finance that the infrastructure practice of infrastructure package with the transition to a reformed business tax system. business tax reform would cut the top rate to 28%, broaden the base and reform the business tax code. in the process it would expand the economy's potential by reducing distortions from the current system that skews investment decisions. moreover, that tax reform would be revenue and net -- revenue- neutral over the medium and long run, but transitioning to the new system raises some 1-time revenue which is what we would use to finance the 1-time investment. in addition to physical capital it is also essential the we invest in human capital through education and training.

a aunt -- already the president has taken steps to make college more affordable, to build on this progress the president has repeated his call for providing every american child with the opportunity to attend a high-quality preschool, which is us something you're going to see in our growth rate next year or the year after but could make a profound difference in decades to come. the same timely to focus on every aspect of education from preschool all the way through job training programs and expanded as backs to apprentice ships. among the most important policy proposal to enhance the economy productivity and long run output is an aggression reform. and a basic level immigration reform would help counteract this large group of labor force by eliminating existing employment based green cards and

making it easier for foreign foreign-born individuals earning a bad -- address degrees in the u.s. is to stay here after they graduate. no one of the things that think economically is most exciting about immigration is not just that it expands the workforce the bed also expands per-capita gdp of. it expands per-capita gdp by expanding total factor productivity. researchers found that immigrants patent at twice the rate of u.s. born citizens and patent at an above average rate even after controlling for their over representation and technical occupations. immigration also has spillover benefits for native inventors with research finding that variations in patent activity across state is tied to changes in states and rant population. moreover, and rents are more likely to start a business than

engage in other forms of entrepreneurship. cbo affirmed this view when it evaluated the senate test of immigration, financial factor productivity would be helpful percentage point higher in 2033 under the legislation. and these innovations can translate into significant economic outcomes, 40 percent of the fortune 500 companies were started by immigrants or their children. while we are trying to attract investors and lunch mirrors from overseas city and state, we are also focused on selling more u.s.-made products the other direction by completing a new free-trade agreements with asia and europe. the trans-pacific partnership or ppp has the potential to be the most significant trade

initiation in generation because it includes 12 countries that are home to a combined 793 million consumers and account for nearly 40 percent of global gdp. together with the trans-atlantic trade and invest -- investment partnership which also offers major potential allowing us to build on the more than 400 billion per year in goods and services that our economy and exports to the european union. to make these new trade agreements are reality, the president has called on congress to enact trade promotion authority, a practice that extends back 30 years and allows congress to set out negotiating objectives while ensuring that final agreements will receive an up or down vote. finally, all of these policies are part of an overall fiscally irresponsible remark. our deficit has come down sharply in the short run, come

nine and a long run. debt will be declining at the share of the economy for the next several years, but after a 2018 net debt will start rising as a share of the economy college as rory will be putting forward a more balanced measures on both the revenue side and the expenditure side to assure that that that is continuing to decline. >> that was part of the remarks from jason furman earlier today. you can see all of his comments 1125 eastern here on c-span2. on the next washington general electric the democrats' legislative agenda and strategy for mitt german elections with representative jim hines of connecticut, finance chairman for the democratic congressional campaign committee. republican senator of north dakota will take your questions about the keystone next -- keystone xl oil pipeline and will be joined by author and dry there to discuss his recent article in foreign affairs

magazine about the affordable care act. live on c-span2 every morning at 7:00 eastern or you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> the new c-span.org website makes it easier than ever for you to keep tabs on washington d.c. and share your finds b.f. facebook, to avert a land of a social networks. easy search functions let you access our daily coverage of events. the tools leg is simple to create short video clips and share them with your friends the facebook, twitter, and other social networks. are you can send links to your video clips and e-mail. just find the tools on our video player or look for the green knight, links their our site. watch washington on the new c-span.org. if he sees something of interest clip it and share it with your friends.

>> now charlie cook of the cook political report highlights of the two to 14 races and previews the 2016 presidential election. he spent the day at a conference hosted by the national association of business economics. this is 50 minutes. >> i and so on an epic was stabbed to very good friends to talk about political situation in washington . i was there during the shutdown. i never seen either one of them as quietly discuss it at our democracy at that point in time, i appreciate that time and spending time with me. i listened to both of these people every day. i get their stuff and i find that unfortunately as an economist may matter more than almost anything else i have none of the last couple of years, their abilities in the capital in the elections a low will come from the elections but policy

and will well and will not and mostly will not be passed. they both have extraordinary as a maze and carriers here in washington. and as political handicappers greg also works with a friend of ours, former vice chairman of the federal reserve and as economic analysis as well with dawn and the federal reserve. charlie has a phenomenal report. a half to complement charlie. he lives in his own personal life story, how he has come to feel about the changes we are dealing with in our country. and so both of these people are good at being non-partisan. i think there might have a loving parent of parties at this point time. as we all do, but they also just really get to the quick and get to the truth of whereat. so with that i will take any more time.

please welcome greg and charlie. [applause] >> well, thank you. great to be here. my friend, diane swonk. hey, david. i see all these friends in the audience. i went around the country last year giving a talk that washington was looking pretty good for investors to be people of the audience looked like dow was on drugs. i said that volume last year and will say it again this morning. i think the three big themes in this city are very, very positive for the markets. you probably know what i will say, will just quickly point out that there will not be a crisis this year in washington. both parties are determined to avoid one. there will not be a default crisis or a budget shut down, nothing like that for at least another year of. i don't have to tell this group,

people like diane and stuart know that this is of the most dovish fed is in our lifetime, and that do not see that changing. in my business seeing institutional investors, there is a phrase that is a gospel. that is, you don't fight the fed the fed will say it -- stay extremely dovish. i'll think that don would agree. you know, if we get a really rotten unemployment number on march 7th i think the possibility of maybe doing 5 billion in said that ten would be in the table. i will not predicted, but i do think that this by all the media hype about a divided fed kelly like the power, and it is all the others, whether it is bill dudley, yellen. you can go right down the line. evans in chicago. it is a very dovish fed, and that you not think that it will change which is a second positive theme. the third positive thing that people just around the country do not acknowledge, and they

really do look at me like i am on that if -- medication my children of the deficit is falling and falling sharply. think this mood of fiscal restraint is grossly under appreciated. i will talk about that in another manner to. i think this matter of fiscal restraint will persist as long as one thing continues, and that is republican control the house. i will leave it to dr. kurt to give us his analysis of where the house is headed after the 2014 election, but i think this team has legs and will continue for quite some time. somebody asked me about the gridlock in washington. i agree that we look dysfunctional, but i was also said that we have had some fairly interesting breakers in the last two or three months. we have a budget deal, paul ryan and patty murray. paul ryan is growing as a politician, not as reflexively

conservative. he was willing to look at even some modest revenue increases. we have a farm bill. it was not a great bill, but we did get one. most importantly you tweet -- see clear signs from the republican leaders in the house that they did not want a crisis of the debt ceiling. we have a meeting right after thanksgiving with one of the leaders in the house. he was quite candid. he said, we heard our brand with the shut down and with the debt ceiling of 70, and we are not going to do it again. we are determined to focus on one issue and one issue only. that issue, of course, is obamacare. the republicans feel that they have been given a gift from god. why do you mess up your narrative on obamacare by precipitating a crisis? so there is not going to be one. i think gridlock has diminished.

who knows. maybe a few months we will see a polls showing that the congressional job approval rating has gone from 12 to 8919% it could be a dramatic improvement in the way the public views congress. well, as part of this strategy on the republican side i think there is a consensus to do nothing, to basically run out the clock ahead of the election. and this could come back to backfire, in my opinion, the republicans if they increasingly are viewed as standing for very little other than being a gain since. eric cantor who is also growing, in my opinion, as a politician, has talked quite openly in the last few weeks about not wanting the republicans to be the party of no. he was there public as to be for at least some kind of reform. yet when i like of the issues -- i will quickly run down some of the issues are before congress this year.

most of them, i see and dim likelihood of any significant action. tax reform, you're going to see a lot about this next 48 hours. the ways and means committee chairman will unveil a very ambitious bill. a lot of interesting features include yellow surtax on the wealthy which might go against republican orthodoxy. he talks about maybe even subject in unique -- muni bond income to a surtax. that is a very controversial subject. he would do away with a lot of sacred tax breaks. this is something that has made most republicans very uneasy. they do not want have attention drawn to anything that controversial. i would say the chances of tax reform this year are at best 10%, and i am being generous to even say that. next year with paul ryan as head of the ways and means committee things could change. and there is immigration.

being an optimist would like to see a bill, i think there's a chance that things could go a little more serious after the primaries. between now and in summer when so many republicans will look over their shoulder to arrive when challenger immigration is off the table is an issue that could move. minimum wage, don't see them all the congressional budget office which everyone likes to beat up on right now has concluded that it could cost jobs. nothing minimal wages an issue for the state. it is not one that will move in congress. by the way, with each passing day chances have diminished that you could get an extension of unemployment benefits retroactive back to january 1. on a wide range of other issues. i don't see a reform. as a cash cow. companies are providing so much money. you have a triumvirate of forces

from the outside reducing the deficit. fannie, freddie. of course j.p. morgan. i think that may continue for a while. cyber security. you will hear a lot about cyber security. the chances of more data breaches this year are 100 percent. there will be more. there are probably more as we sit here this morning, but chances of abela pretty damn. you get the sense that every way you look the legislative agenda is looking pretty meager. and don't want to totally rule out, companies that hire and train your peers. it could be something like that, but there will not be a lot. one final thing that i want to throw up, just a beam of mine that i have been talking about for the last two or three months . frankly, and leaves me puzzled. cannot quite figure this one up.

we have an economy that will grow in the second half by three nap%. three and a half percent gdp rise, and it was not all inventory accumulation. a real improvement on trade, and many areas looked good. the budget deficit fell sharply. i will take on the cbo says everyone does. there recede estimates for the next two or three years for low stingy. no matter how you slice of the deficit as a percentage of gdp is said below 3% in the next you're too. all of this good news, yet no one in this city wants to a knowledgeable take credit for it it is the damnedest fan ever seen. let me finish with the comment of resources in this city does seem unwilling to a knowledge of fact that things have gone better. you have asked the question, could this be a self-fulfilling prophecy? first and foremost was surprisingly is the media.

i have friends here in the press, but i think the media feels he could sell morning's papers and get better ratings when you talk about the negative during the holidays my blood pressure spike about 20 points. i saw two stories talking about the recession as if it were still underway. for christ's sake, the recession was in june of 09. he still here in the press talk of how we're in recession. granted, it has not been a great recovery, but think the press continues to harp on the negative. the second factor, it does not want to acknowledge improvement. the republicans. you don't want to, if you are a republican talk about the obama economy starting to pick up, but the ironic to irony is the pickup has been quite pronounced in the midwest which is still with republican governors whether snyder in michigan are pence in indiana, greg valliere and ohio, scott walker in wisconsin.

you're seeing republican governors presiding over recovery of the national party almost refuses to a knowledge. if anyone has been in san francisco recently faugh of. the census scope bay area is just on fire. if their relatives of the narrative without terrible things are. one of -- the message to the base is that things i out of control. we'll profligate. ding said gone totally off a cliff in washington on spending. but in truth it is exactly the opposite. you realize this year we will have spent less on domestic discretionary spending and in the last year of the george w. bush a administration? yet at the same time, there is narrative by the republicans that spending is out of control.

the third area where you see a refusal to acknowledge the positive are the democrats. it was as if they started to say things really are starting to get better, it would diminish their chances for more social spending, whether it is a minimum-wage hike or unemployment benefits of food stamps. i think the democrats feel that it they talk of the economy, you know, it could actually have their narrative, there pitch for more benefits. and god forbid any democrat would say in public or the white house would maybe boast a little that the stock market went up by 30% last year. i don't hear that. i think the aversion to that to me even though i think about 50 percent of all adults have an investment in the stock market. it is a curious phenomenon in this town. i have been cut off oil in the last few days where they're is a genuine rebound. as i said, especially in the bay area. then you come back here and there is nothing but gloom and

doom. it is a strange phenomenon. i will and good that sort of perplexing comment, but as i said earlier, i think the key factor in whether these trends continue is what happens in congress. i will turn over the charlie. >> thank you. [applause] >> well, thank you, diane, for that generous introduction and thank you all for inviting this year. for me speaking to a room full of economists is like social climate. i am one of the few people that can say that. i look around and see a number of friends. anyway, in washington -- most people, like, live here. they watched politics like it is sports and watch individual races like their fantasy football or rotisserie baseball is something. and i am sure they find it entertaining. i think i used to feel that way,

but then, you know, less so these days. what is really important? i think the governing configuration after this election and what his 2016 going to look like? and at least for this next election -- into a certain extent for 2015 and 16 you can make for assumptions. number one, the house is going to stay in republican hands, and you can put a number. ninety-five, 90 -- at 99%. well, whenever. ninety-eight. what the hell. extremely high probability of the house was a republican, number one. number two, the senate. right now 55 democratic of 45 republican the republicans have of five seat gain, and joe biden would break the tie. i think you can say with a great deal of certainty that after this election the majority party

will have 53 fewer seats, barely 52 or fewer, and that think it is a pretty good bet that the majority party will have 51 seats or fewer -- qaeda 5149 or 5050 with biden breaking the tie. the senate will be more or less give -- 5050 give or take a seat in one direction or the other. and keep in mind that -- well, i will get into that and a minute. number three, president obama's job approval rating, which call you know, he can't run for reelection, but it is how we measure cloud. his approval ratings have averaged about 41% for several months now. he seems to be in a narrow trading range of dropping them as low as 38 and the size 46. you know, more often than not 41% to ever take a point with another 50, 51, 52 percent disapproval rating, obviously this is a bad place to be. in a bad place for a party to go

into reelection. the fourth thing that i think @booktv-it said the president has a high floor and a low ceiling. so there is not a lot of elasticity in his job or poor rating when not as much as certain other presidents have been. to be honest and of some mischance of visiting of the range anytime between now and the end of the term for any extended amount of time. the fourth assumption is i think there is no reason to believe that his relations with congress will get better regardless with what happens this election. obviously there is in terrific relationship with the tea party republicans. it is a really bad relationship with the establishment republicans, and i would say his relations with his own party on capitol hill are roughly comparable with jimmy carter's. in other words, awful. and it, you know, in the case of his own party it is not

particularly ideological or anything like that. it is really more he just temperamentally does not like talking to them. he does not like being around them. he is in around them as little as it possibly can. and you know, we just have to remember that here is guy who was basically a full-time senator for one year and then next year he was -- 2005. 2006 was another one circuit for democrats around the country, and was on a good bit. seven and eight he was running for president. you it does not particularly no war like these people. if you grab five house democrats off the street and picked out the top five for the leaders and many other five rank-and-file and four out of five which of you they have never had no ball white house staffers step foot in their office. four out of five will tell you they have never had a conversation with the president of unpleasantries are never been

in a room within with fewer than eight people. when you read the books about lyndon johnson and his relationship with congress and what he was willing to do to get things done, it is just a dramatic, a dramatic difference. obviously one -- and then johnson was a creature of congress of. of of ron reagan knew had never met with -- public could not have named the 25 members of congress. it turned out to have a very effective relation to the congress. as a matter of temperament, personality. if you want to be random the you know, it shows. that is why this relationship with congress, with even his own party in congress is very weak. kind of that sort of the bottom

line of how i see this year and the next two years after that. he likes the last year or two you will love the next three. whether it's democrats and 510 republicans and 51 in the senate and, you know, the senate will still be pretty gridlock with the rules that it has. that is just tell i look at it. the thing to remember in the house is that 93 percent of all of the republicans in the house are sitting in districts that romney carried 93 percent. 96 percent of all the democrats in the house are in districts that barack obamacare. a lot of this is redistricting, but not all of it. part of this population soaring. he think about it where the most democrats live? in live in urban areas in college towns. carter republicans live?

karos, an outer suburbs to the suburbs and rural, small town. and so even if you did not have any malicious line drawing there is a certain sorting out the takes place, and the other thing is that we would call it the last four elections you had in 2006 back to back democratic tidal wave elections that sort of -- and then. the republican sitting in a district pretty much got washed out in six, eight, or 12. conversely, the 2010 was just a horrific election for democrats. the biggest loss that either party has had since 1948. bsn midterm since 1938. we are talking more than historic, almost biblical losses. if you're a democrat sitting in a district the democrats should not have, you probably got

washed out in 2010. and so there has been a culling of the herd. there are few members sitting in competitive districts anymore. as greg pointed out earlier, for most members of congress if you're a democrat your in far more danger of losing to a primary tel more liberal or if you're a republican, losing to a more republican candid. a house is basically done a unless some mind-boggling event occurs. it is that until they draw maps again back in 2021. in the senate, you know, the democrats are just way overexposed and the senate. and you know it is a matter of having 21 seats up to -- and keep in mind in the senate you always have to think in six years cycles. whatever happened six years ago, that is on the table is set or the cards are dealt for that election. so of a party has a fabulous selection one-year, six years later they go win over exposed.

so democrats have told c-span2 to 15, five open seats that they have to defend without the vantage of incumbency republicans, but most importantly there are four democratic some treats that are in states where romney won by 15 points are more. and to mitt romney traded by 14 points. six democratic seats are up and really, really go are really red states. again, very, very high degrees of exposure caught none of the

democrats are goners. democratic incumbents, but then mentions are facing extremely difficult races. the conventional wisdom is that mark beyer from arkansas is toast. i would not say toast, but you know when you put a piece of white bread and a toaster oven and when they just are as having a little bit of that kind of base look. and then when you kind of go through the numbers you say, well, republicans ought to get the states. they have to the they have to defend, an open seat in georgia was depends a low bed on whether republicans nominate what i call on normal chromosomal linemen republican of weather then nominate one that my wife is trying to leave me a stop using the term wacko.

i am going with exotic and potentially problematic. [laughter] and coming year know, this has been a theme in quite a few senate races in recent years where there was a republican who go if they had run would have had a fabulous chance of winning maybe they didn't or maybe they did run and are not able to get through because they lost to someone is like a potentially problematic. democrats have figured this out. lisa in missouri and new where you have three republicans running man. one would have probably be in the democratic incumbent more easily. one properly would have beaten her, but then there was one that was exotica him. and so democrats went to an end ran tv ads during the republican primary accusing -- todd a. kendis too conservative for misery. and our republican primary

thermae into the briar patch. you know, and they were able to basically steer the republican nomination to the one guy that was capable of seizing the fee from the jaws of victory and successfully did so. and so you're going to be seeing so that going on this time as well. and then mitch mcconnell and be, if you did a poll today it would be 45-45, 45-46. is that an extremely close race? is not. the district may gama -- john mccain was really hurting. that affected the performance of republican candidates, but not so much in kentucky that obama was not, you know -- kentucky was not an obama state. let's just say that. mccotter of 53 percent of the vote last time. mitch mcconnell is this race this year i think it is not

because there will be any more democrats in the state than there were six years ago or liberals and the state than there were six years ago. it will be because there were three or more percentage points of people in kentucky that would vote against any leader in congress. i hate washington. i hate congress of where. everybody says you're one of those powerful, visible leaders in congress cliff. i must tell you more than the rest of them. that is the challenge that mcconnell and spirit to the extent that he can do things that might help them in a general election, it can exacerbate his situation with the tea party primary challenge. if you get smushed all this together it sure looks on the

micro race by race basis like republicans ought to be able to get their 60 seat gain. this is what holds me back. i can make the same .2 different ways. of last five elections nationwide. 2004, six, eight, ten, 12, five elections nationwide. 160, one of the 70 races. republicans defeated a grand total of three senate democratic incumbents in five elections nationwide. debris -- b. lincoln in arkansas ,-all and south dakota, fine gold and wisconsin. that said. during the same five elections democrats defeated 11 republican senate incumbents but three versus 11. that is kind of interesting, particularly when you consider that one of those five was 2010 and which was a fabulous year for republicans, one that picked

up six senate seats but they only knocked off, what, one senate democrat incumbent that year. there is something going on the republicans have had of the last decade a real problem mocking of democratic incumbents, and after knocked out two or three this time. now, maybe is the same thing. maybe not. our newsletter, we do in updated at least weekly to the whole election cycle, every house and senate race in the country, solid democrat, solid republican , likely, leaving, tossup. it is the leaves and tossups of a competitive races. going into election day 2010, a great year for republicans. going into election day we had seven senate races that we called a tossup. seven. republicans lost five out of seven. interesting. 2012 we had ten tossups the

races that year. republicans lost eight out of ten. so the close ones -- now, 2010, yes, republican pickup. but if you had read time magazine a month to before the election he would have known there were going to pick up most of them. so the close races have not been breaking their way. is this because of corporate branding problems, and image problems? to a certain extent. is it because of problems the can go into detail on. is it problems with nominating the right people? nominating the right people were getting the right people to run? is of the above. but for them to get to 51 seats they're going to have -- they're going to need a change of, from where it has been laid the. you know, maybe it happens, maybe it does not.

so how much longer do i have? i will just sort of -- i am going to sit down and i am going to desperately hope that some point somebody asks me about the democratic and republican presidential races in 2016. [laughter] i can't possibly do without blowing the help of my time slot i am available to answer any questions. let's just say that. anyway, thank you all very much. [applause] >> right your questions down and send them up and i will take the privilege of moderating the panel and asked charlie, what about 2016. >> which one? which one first? >> you can take this for everyone to go. >> okay. let's do -- is that c-span?

[laughter] i love you guys. i do, actually. you know, charlie candid toward charlie totally unfiltered. >> i like charlie unfiltered. >> i like a dragon filters plexus' like bobby drake. anyway, -- >> i will be back next week. >> there you go. let's go with republicans first. a kind of have a problem with this notion that chris christie was the front runner for the republican nomination before the whole bridge thing. don't get me wrong. if you think of a football field and the right end of the football field, but think it's smart for relevance to nominate somebody that is on the 35-yard line, someone that can win among conservatives but also go into the middle, absolutely? the thing is the heart and soul

of the republican nomination, presidential nomination process is in the base. and think about one of the -- some of the people the republicans seriously considered nominating before they finally settled on an romney, the taliban money and qualifications michele bachmann, herman cain, rick santorum, rick perry, newt gingrich. note over going to play a game. where do i start. michele bachmann, herman cain, rick santorum, rick perry commended gingrich, chris christie. now, a lot of you have kids. remember the sesame street songs. one of these things is not like the other. it is really, really hard to sort of look at all of these

desperately wanted to nominate and then jump ball the way over to chris christie. and i just -- we have seen parties make huge swings, but it was usually after they had a crash and burn election. of course after goldwater in '64 republicans moved to the middle and nominated richard nixon and won the presidency, but they have a crash and burn election first. democrats have a crash and burn election in 72 with george mcgovern. republicans have not had their crash and burn. and so i just have a hard time seeing them do that. the other super big name is jim bush. i think he was a terrific governor of florida. i think he would be well-positioned and all of that. there is of less than thing. when push comes to sell that would cut down if he runs.

is live despises politics. and you think, a running for president with a non supporter spouse, that is kind of hard. you know, the daughters have some personal issues. you want to throw your kid up there. they're son is running four-lane commissioner in texas. you want the lay of this dynasty stefan the kid's head. i did not think for a wide variety of reasons he will look at it and really want to run and not pull the trigger. when you look at the republican field by stories combativeness, the recidivists, mike huckabee and rick santorum going after the social thing. rick perry running where rick perry runs. after the election jury said that -- said, well, you know, in 2012 by one to run for president in the worst wait, and i did.

[laughter] as much running to get the monkey off his back. you will see how that because. santorum and huckabee. then you give into the tea party senators. and, you know, ted cruises will we thought rand paul was going to be. you know, the gatt coming into the capitol building with uneasy spraying it in every direction rolling grenades down the aisle and trying to be the most destructive force that he could possibly be. the thing is, in the presidential race the establishment, remember how the establishment, during the time when gingrich was a front runner and the republican establishment just surrounded am and kicked the hell out of the guy, the establishment cannot dictate you will be the republican nominee, but they can share a sell stops somebody, and there is nobody -- i have been in washington 41, almost 42 years.

no less come to washington and kicked off more people in both parties faster than takers has. that would come back -- it has gotten a lot of great press among conservatives. that will bite him on the rear end. rand paul is the data surprised everybody. he has proven to be far more pragmatic, more politically sophisticated, smoother. this guy, just forget his father just forget it. this guy is not at all like that . is the incredibly sick -- incredibly conservative? oh, yes. this guy does not come through as a net. he really doesn't. i think he is a formidable person. marco rubio, you know, he ran as a tea party candidate for the senate, but since then he has been conservative. not so much a tea party person. he came out for immigration reform very strongly. gun a big blow back from

conservatives. let's see if he moves beyond that. i am curious if in a lame-duck session immigration does come up in a lame-duck and get -- whether it takes that sort of monkey off his back a little bit we will see. and then you get to the four republican governors that are most often mentioned i can give you the long form, but we don't have time. the guy to watch is scott walker and then when you look at the establishment capitol hill types and i don't think there's going to be one. paul ryan will become chairman of the ways and means committee. rob portman mostly in the senate and hope it gets picked as a running mate, but i don't think there will be a republican capitol hill slide. keep in mind, the accuracy rate for party nominations is far out, pretty much as zero.

i would say, watch rand paul n. scott walker. rand paul for the tea party site. scott walker for the really, really concerted non tea party side. there is just not enough out there for a not quite so conservative legacy republican party like we used to know. there is practically no room for that right now. >> i'm going to ask greg is. in your opinion, you did not mention the democratic race, if there is one. i know i have seen the ads, 61%. hillary clinton will be a runner, whether -- this foregone conclusion that we have had about hillary clinton has often been wrong. as you said, the accuracy forecasting these things out, have visited upon the democratic side? you mentioned the chance of immigration reform and lame-duck. a great handicap on this side of it. way you think on your side of

it? >> i would defer to charlie. it is worth noting that both the west cannot kick paid by the word or else we will get paid nothing. >> not here, anyway. >> this is the do you believe in free speech, how would you like to get one? >> so i will defer to charlie on that. i think i share his view that it is not a lead pipe sense that she is going to run. >> okay. >> i have heard you say that recently, the you are not sure she is going to run. >> if this is a political decision she is running. taken to the bank. i would argue that a lot of these things, a lot of these decisions are personal as much as political. and i just think that there is maybe a 30 percent chance to show it -- so that she does not

run. the logic is right now she is 66 years old. she will be turning 67 later this year in october. she will be 67 going up 68 in 200015. she will be 69 the two weeks before the election in 2016. now, can you get elected and 69? of course you can. that's exactly the same major ronald reagan was. absolutely you can, and i am not arguing for a moment that age would be an issue. i'm not making that case at all. i think that when you are 60 -- this time next year will be when she is making her mind up. she will be 67 with a 68 per day later on. making a 9-year commitments when your 67 years old, you have got to really think long and hard come out alive feel about this? how do i feel up to it? she has an incredibly grueling job as secretary of state.

you know, toward the end there were some health issues and things that came out. i'm not saying that disqualifies her in any way because i don't think that it does, but do i feel up to it? and back in december of 2011 when she was running for the nomination i spent one day on the road with her campaign in iowa. i think we left the hotel at 615, 630 in the morning. we got back about 130 the next morning. beat the hell of me, and a lot younger. she was doing that every day. i just had to do it once. i think that no one knows better than she does sell arduous it is to run for president. that think there is alaska's no one in three chance that she does not run. >> by the way, biden turns 74 right after the election in 2016. >> not that all of you are not better at math and i am, so she

would be 77 at the end of the second term. you know, just -- again, they've she runs the think the odds are overwhelming that she would be the democratic nomination. she will have to deal with how i've become more relevant to the future. she can't run a, hey, remember how great the economy was when my husband was president back in the 1990's. you can't run a campaign of back to the future, but of sure she knows that. the and his voters will have been two years old and has been left office. you know, to have to run a very different campaign and she never has before. >> i would just that i think she has to differentiate yourself to a certain degree from barack obama, is 41 percent job approval rating. how'd she do that without alienating obama supporters? will not be easy. >> i have a couple of questions

there are a lot of them on the debt ceiling, how long will the honeymoon last. we have austerity. the other is related to this, well the speaker of the house keep his job? and the man is the factions in that house? is the house on the customer implosion? so of the issue of the drama he just got a vacation house. he is wondering if he is leaving. >> i will do the debt ceiling fiscal stuff. we don't have another debt ceiling set -- debt ceiling fight for another year or so.

the budget showdown. fiscal austerity being dead to my go back to these two great themes and images at the beginning, no crisis. the two great themes, very accommodative fed of fiscal restraint also for at least another two or three years. as charlie points out, we do not redistrict until 2021. it is a pretty safe bet that this house needs republicans for a while. and as long as it does people forget, there are seven more years of a sequester. they tinker around with the little bit. they reduced to the bid. they had offsetting revenue raisers, spending cuts. sequester is not gone. the discretionary l.a. stays flat. the big issue is whether anyone

has the courage to take on entitlements. the evidence from the last month is quite discouraging on that front. paul ryan had a little tiny change from military tyree's which blew up in his face in the head to undo a. you saw last week the white house abandon the effort and the small change in the cpi for social security. i would suggest that is a real elephant and the room. other readdress that letter is unclear. domestic discretionary spending stays flat bed down for the next several years. >> stands father is right that the speaker and his wife currently on a condo in south florida recently but said they have been going down there for years. i have been thinking for six months or so that the speaker would probably step down, resign or something right after the election, not before because you never want to be a lame duck speaker for any amount of time. to me the speaker of the house,

here's a guy who loves life. they were never going to carry him out of the house a pine box. this guy, i think it is like, okay, have been speaker for four years. it is an enormous honor. there is no higher honor in congress than to be speaker of the house. i am tired -- tired of dealing with some of these, you know, as some people close to him have described it as the cave man caucus. and i am out of here. you know, and i kind of thing that there is a very good chance. also, a huge majority leader eric cantor fellow with the last year, year-and-a-half increasingly he is looking and acting more like somebody that is about to take over power. and the adversarial relationship that they had four years ago is gone i a specter that, you know,

a year from today we will probably be looking the speaker not the current one, and it will be that anyone beats and, but that he was just say, you know, this has been a lot of fun. there are golf courses yet to play. and vintages yet to assess. >> we are running out of time. want to give my deep thanks to my two friends, charlie and greg now you rely on them so much . ' the lot. they say in so colorfully and not to give the and make me a better economist for it. thank-you both, and we appreciate you being here. [applause] >> on the next washington journal a look at the to a cress legislative agenda as strategy for the midterm election ..

>>