million people out of work. why didn't we instead of paying unemployment, why didn't we put them to work doing infrastructure? >> i agree. i was one of the people saying that the stimulus bill originally, you know, needed a lot more infrastructure spending in it. because the unemployment within the building trades was about 20, 25%. and infrastructure spending would have gotten a lot of those people back to work. so the stimulus bill did not have enough infrastructure spending. and we should have then passed the highway bill on top of the stimulus bill which would have really gotten people back to work. i agree with you. we do need to look at countries like germany to see what they do with a very active workforce on how we can keep people in the workforce so they don't lose their in spite or instead of getting unemployment benefits. keep them at work, maybe have a government partnership with some of these companies i think would probably be the best way to go. so i agree with you.

i think infrastructure spending is a good way to get a lot of people back to work. think about what we're saying here. we're talking about government investments in things that need to be done, in roads and bridges all across the united states, airports, you know, hopefully high speed rail one day. but also combined sewer overflow. in akron, for example, it's like a billion dollar bill for to deal with their combined sewer. akron doesn't have that kind of money. we need federal investments. and it gets people back to work, raises tax revenue, and we're up and running. >> on the spending issue, the cbo headlines in the papers this morning, here is the washington times. no sun in the cbo forecast. this is a tweet from joseph ramirez. representative ryan, the cbo saying spend more now, save later? explain. >> well, i think at this point politically that having investments coming from the federal government wouldn't even have a committee hearing in the house of representatives.

and i think the most reasonable economist would say in this kind of liquidity trap that we're in, you spend now to get us out, and then have long-term deficit spending. and i think doing the buffett rule, getting some money up-front or even in the next ten years from the top 1% in investing that money in the infrastructure spending now would be a good thing. but the key is long-term. we've got to deal with the long-term deficit issue. there is no doubt about it. but if you don't get revenues up, you don't get people back to work, you're not going to have the revenues you need to have long-term deficit reduction. >> the cbo director may provide more clarity in what he was trying to say yesterday. he'll be up on capitol hill before the house committee, your committee at 10:00 a.m. live coverage on c-span 3 this morning. dorothy is a democrat in kansas city, missouri. good ahead, dorothy. >> caller: good morning, c-span. >> good morning. >> caller: and thank you, congressman, for really trying

to do the right thing. i am a democrat and i am also a christian. when i see -- i've been here 66 years. and what i see going on is hurting the whole country. most people do want to work. there is always going to be some people that don't want to work. when i got out of high school, i wanted to work and couldn't find a job. i was a very good student. but what i want to say is keep pressing on. clean energy is the way. >> thank you. >> oil is just a way of somebody's pockets getting fat. >> she brought up -- when she said something, i thought back in youngstown there used to be steel mills on each side of the road. and you could quit your job and walk across the street or down the road and get another one immediately. i mean that's -- that's the real

incentive to work is know you're going to go and get a good paying job. let's go to eddie, a republican in lawrenceville, georgia. you're up next. >> caller: yes. i was wondering if mr. ryan would please look up in the webster's dictionary the meaning of the word fair. it means that everybody gets treated equal. and i wish you would look that up and quit using the word fair, because the rich pay most of the taxes in this country, and you know that. if you don't know it, you should find out about it. president obama has spent over a billion dollars -- i mean a trillion dollars this year. the numbers came out yesterday. the numbers look dismal. it looks like we're going to be in a slump until 2018. and then you want to talk about a high-speed rail? i don't want to ride on a train and smell everybody's b.o.

i want to have my own car. and oil is going to be around for at least 100 years before you get alternative energies that pay off. you know -- >> okay, eddie, i'm going to take that last point. oil around for 100 years before these alternative energies pay off. >> yeah, it's not our oil. we have 2% of the world's oil. and if, eddie, you want to rely on the saudis and the middle eastern countries for oil, hey, god bless you. i just don't think that is a good long-term strategy for the united states when we have the innovative capacity, the creativity to lead a revolution. not to mention the issue of global warming which i'm sure you may not be that concerned with. but many of us are. and think that this could be a whole new industry for us. but to say we're going to rely on oil from the saudis for the next 100 years i think is really reducing and diminishing america. and he talked about fairness. eddie, it is fair that people in

the united states of america, the wealthiest country in the world have a sick child that can't get adequate health care or affordable health care because of the screwed up health care system we've got? is it fair that someone is sitting in youngstown or akron, ohio, had to feel the ramifications of a deregulated wall street of people who followed their self-interest right off a cliff and took the entire economy down with it? is that fair? no, that's not fair. fairness is regulating the markets and making sure that the bounty and the blessings of america get spread across for everybody to at least have a modicum of fairness. and that means health care, affordable education, and a basic standard of living. >> stella on twitter wants to know this. where the heck are all the gas taxes going since the infrastructure is so bad. where is it? >> part of is it's not geared for inflation. so it gets outpaced almost immediately once a lot of these gas taxes are put on.

and at the end of the day, it gets more and more expensive to pave roads and do bridges and everything else because of the inflation within the economy. i think we do need to figure out a better way to fund our infrastructure and to get more money in the pot because we've got a lot of needs. but at the end of the day, most citizens support taxes on gasoline because they know they're going to give it at the tank and it's going to go to the roads. you can always see the benefits of it. >> let's go to lancaster, pennsylvania. john, an independent. >> caller: yes, congressman, it's a pleasure to hear you after the last few days of listening to the republican race to the bottom. yeah, a couple of quick ones. are you one of the co-sponsors of the new get money out of politics bill that is circulating in congress? i understand there is about 35 people. >> yeah. >> caller: in that. and then secondly, why don't the

democrats get together with the occupy wall street folks more vocally and just talk with them and about them? there is going to be a spring and a summer that is going to rock the united states. and it would behoove you guys to get on their boat. they've got a lot more voices than anyone has given them credit for. >> yeah, i think that's an important point. yes, i am for getting money out of politics. i think that is the number one corrupting factor of the cause of the problems down here in washington, d.c. so getting the money out is, you know, running every two years and having to raise millions and millions of dollars and your eye comes off the ball, which is legislation and figuring out how to solve the country's problems. in the occupy movement i think has really been one of the most important movements in my lifetime in politics because they are at the right spot. they're at wall street. and there is a lot of big money folks who have been spending a lot of money over the last 30

years saying the problems in washington, you know. go to washington. washington is the problem, not the solution, from reagan on. and at the end of the day, it was a bunch of big money people saying stay way from wall street. let us do what we want. go blame washington. take all your anger and frustration with globalization and changes in the economy, go blame washington for those problems. and finally the light bulb went off and there is a lot of people on wall street now doing the occupy movement. which i think is really, really important, because it has shifted the focus from the tea party ideology of sorts in washington to the real source of the problem, where all the money comes from that funds these ads and funds washington, d.c. is wall street. it's great. >> tracy is a democrat in washington, d.c. go ahead, tracy. >> caller: hi. thank you, congressman, for your efforts. and just as the previous caller said, to keep us from racing to the bottom. have i two quick questions. first of all, people are against

their own needs only because president obama. he has passed ledbetter that has allowed people to have equal pay. which means these people against president obama is going to get equal pay to their male counterparts. another thing is no one will be denied insurance. i work as a nurse, which is very important. only the very rich and the very poor are able to get adequate health care. so these people who are against the president and his policies are against their own basic health care. so i wish that the democrats would go out there and just specifically tell people these things because they're not getting it. thank you very much. >> agreed. >> okay. >> a boring file clerk on twitter says can you name me one thing that isn't the fault of the republicans? do the dems have no fault for this economic mess? >> there is plenty of

responsibility to go around. i think when you look at the fact that president bush was in office. the republicans controlled the congress for much of that time, and they completely deregulated wall street and anything else they could get their hands on, they defunded administrative agencies that were charged with overseeing wall street. and this was a basic strategy of conservative right wing think tanks and i'dologists who say deregulate, defund the government, let the private sector work no matter what happens, and that's been their philosophy. where i think the democrats are saying we need not too much government, but we need well regulated markets. we don't need too much spending, but we do need to make some really smart investments into infrastructure and to research and development and the sciences

and education to make sure everybody can afford it. there is plenty of blame to go around. but i think if you look at who was pushing this philosophy, and has been for a long time, we had pretty stable markets up until about 1980. then we got into the savings & loan problems at the end of the '80s. and we had the housing problems. we get this volatility in the markets. because of this whole deregulation idea. and i think we need to get back to what served the country so well from post world war ii until about 1980. well-regulated markets, making sure that the level of income and equality and income disparity isn't so huge that people go on the public dole because it maybe does pay better than an actual job. invest back in the middle class. so there is blame to go around. but at the end of the day, its right wing who has controlled the tax and trade policies in the united states. >> let's go to the republican line. randy, black river falls, wisconsin. >> caller: good morning.

after listening to the representative talk here, i heard him say we don't want to be dependent on the saudis for all our oil. >> yep. >> caller: but then again, you don't want the pipeline going down where the united states would get oil from the keystone pipeline either. that would be 20,000 immediate jobs and over 100,000 jobs for truck drivers, everything all the way down. once you get all these jobs, do you know how much tax all those people payment into the government, to get this government going, to get it out of recession? president obama and the labor relations board, they didn't even want boeing to come in down there. and all those thousands of jobs that was going to be in down there. i hope the people of the united states are really listening to you double-take on everything you say and try to blame everything on the republicans. president obama is so far over his head in his job, he's got to be gone.

i'll take anybody. i'll take another democrat other than president obama. he is way over his head. >> all right. randy. let me get the congressman to respond to you about keystone and energy issues. >> you know, the numbers have fluctuated on different studies that i've seen about keystone. but again, at the end of the day, oil is not the answer. and i know those are -- those could be a potentially temporary jobs that we would have in the united states, and i'm for jobs in the united states. i don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. but i'm talking about long-term. and i think, you know, a gentleman like that, you know, many instances, we see what we want to see. i'm in ohio. you know what i've seen? i saw president obama and senator sherrod brown and others save the american auto industry. and because of that, we have plants in toledo, lorraine, just outside of youngstown and lordstown ohio. auto workers working, making good money. he put tariffs on chinese tubing coming in which led to the steel

mill i mentioned earlier, $650 million of investments. got almost a thousand building trades out there working right now building the facility. another company located in brookfield, tmk and i think they're going to add more. 20 bucks an hour these are. because of the tariff president obama put on the chinese. so it may be convenient to say to pick one or two issues. but i think when you look on the whole of what he has done compared to what the circus is going on in the republican primaries right now, it's clear that this is the man who we need to lead us into the next four years. >> matthew is an independent in port clinton, ohio. we're talking to congressman tim ryan of ohio, democrat. go ahead. >> caller: hi, tim. to tell you the truth, i don't think there is very much that you have said that is true this morning. it's very difficult to do business in ohio. it's been tax and regulated right out of business. ohio's spending is insane. i've seen some of the things they do right in my immediate area. and we can't go on with the spending. thank you.

>> well, my talk of regulation was more about wall street regulation, not necessarily not all that familiar with exactly what goes on from the stateside of regulation. but my point was wall street has been completely deregulated. and that led to everyone following their self-interest off the cliff, which affected a lot of places right outside of port clinton and toledo and the housing problems on the west side of cleveland and places like toledo have been huge because of that lack of responsibility and lack of cops on the beat on wall street. and at the end of the day, it's been a real problem. and it's important to know too right now, when you talk about the regulatory state of environment in ohio we have a republican governor, a republican house, a republican senate. so, you know, and you're talking about the business environment in ohio. if you have a complaint, you shouldn't be levying it upon the trats because the democrats don't control anything in ohio

right now. >> congressman tim ryan, thanks for talking was. >> great to be with you. thank you. on our next washington journal we'll talk with rob woodall and chris van hollen about the latest congressional budget office report. and later, robert jones of the public religious research institute joins us to discuss politics and religion. "washington journal" airs each morning at 7:00 eastern on c-span. republicans have introduced bills in the house and senate that would revamp the federal budget process. the legislation would make it more difficult for congress to pass spending bills without first having passed a budget. some of the bills gop supporters spoke to reporters about the legislation.

>> a good group, isn't it. thank you all for coming. the american people are not happy with how congress and the administration manages their money. and i have concluded that they are basically right. first and foremost, we are borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend. that's so irresponsible as to produce no real argument in return that this is legitimate. second, in our budget process, we've known for years it's filled with a whole lot of gimmicks, techniques and methods that have developed over the years to hide the real cost of spending. we think in the 2012 process we're already seeing many of these gimmicks be employed. one little gimmick would be to

provide for more money for a popular program like the s-chip, the children's insurance, and you expect to spend that would be called for under the budget procedures. then that allows the money to be appropriated at some other point as extra money. instead of like a family who plans to have a air conditioner and budgets $2,000 for it, it comes in at $1500, they don't then go and treat the $500 as free money to be spent. it's still in their bank account. it has not yet been spent. it should stay there. we are appropriating money in violation of the budget act before we have a budget. we should have a budget first. this bill would deal with that. and i would just say i appreciate my friend and colleague martha roby. she's got energy and drive. and she has filed this

legislation in the house last night that we filed in the senate last year. i believe we on the road to moving forward with legislation that will create more honesty in our budgeting process. many of these are technical, but they're real. it will create more honesty, more fairness, more ability for the american people to understand how much congress is spending and it will be good for america. and i think in the end, few if engender any real good government objection. martha, thank you for your good work, and i'll turn it over to you. >> well, thank you so much, senator sessions. and what a tremendous honor to be standing here with these distinguished members of congress in support of the honest budget act. and on behalf of the american people. i am pleased to introduce the house companion bill to senator

sessions' senate bill. i also want to thank all of my freshmen colleagues and let me mention representative hyzynga. 13 months ago our freshman class came to washington, and we came from different states with different backgrounds but certainly with a common purpose. we came here to cut spending. we came here to limit federal power, and we came to restore integrity to the federal government. we have seen firsthand the tricks of the trade and the gimmicks used to distort the truth and hide new spending. we learned that through precedent or bad habit, these gimmicks have become institutionalized by both houses of congress and both parties are very guilty of exploiting them. i am convinced along with everyone standing here with me today, that we can do much better. i believe that america deserves a government that shoots straight and that tells the truth. whereas we're all keenly aware

that the number one issue facing america right now is jobs. and that this federal government is doing all that we can to create legislation to help foster an environment where the private sector can do just that. create jobs. but we cannot overlook the reality that we are spending money that we do not have. this reckless spending spree that has happened here in washington has no doubt significantly contributed to the downward economy. and this bill directly and specifically addresses the exact gimmicks in our currented and will ton lead to increased deficits. americans deserve an honest accountable, predictable budget process, and this bill goes through nine specific gimmicks that are most commonly used. the bill offered by senator sessions and senator snowe is geared toward senate procedure. and our legislation in the house expands this approach where

revenue inappropriation bills are first considered. we desire and are pushing for a process that instills integrity to the budget process. integrity is the highest human value we have. we must change the way washington works. we must require a budget process that is accountable, predictable and truthful. and this honest budget act is certainly a step in the right direction. and i want to thank you all again for being here today. and now i'm going to turn to senator kay bailey hutchison and her colleagues for a few remarks. thank you. >> thank you so much. is wonderful to have so many of our colleagues willing to come out and say that this is an important bill. and it's kind of a technical bill because it doesn't have the budget cuts in it. but if there is one thing that stands out to me, it is when we have an emergency funding bill

that comes up. and it's for an unexpected expense in our military or it's a disaster where we have wildfires or hurricanes or tornadoes. and then all of a sudden, you see things being put on this bill and we call it a christmas tree because there are things that are not relevant to the emergency. if we could just make sure that we have a real budget which this bill will do, that we work from a budget that we stick to a budget and that we have emergency funding only when it's a real emergency, that in itself will help the transparency and the honesty and integrity that is going to be required if we are going to cut the deficits and get our economic stability back on track. and that's what all of us want to do. thank you. >> sen enzi? senior budget member. >> thank you.

first i'd like to thank the house for actually passing a budget last year. the united states has been without a budget now for over 1,000 days. and the budget they passed took a lot of flack but it was a budget. and it had the potential to solve a lot of problems. so now we're here today to demand a budget, but also to ask for one that's honest. it shouldn't take an accountant to tell you when they are fudging on the numbers. but it does. we steal from trust funds. we take money that will come in over a ten-year period and say we're going to pretend like we got it over a two-year period. and fund some new programs. not eliminate debt that we've got. not make the united states more responsible, more respected, more in a position where they can continue to be the strongest country in the world. and that's a problem that we've got to solve. so it's time that we got rid of the gimmicks. it's time we got more

transparency in the budget, but it's very important that we have a budget. >> thank you, mike. our senator's numbers have grown and so all the house members are not speaking, but if you -- would any of you -- i want all of you to come and introduce yourself and say a few words. >> so i'm bob corker. i strongly support what martha and jeff have put forward. one of the greatest frustrations here is knowing that so much of what happens in the budgeting process is make believe. what's it's worth, i voted for no appropriations bills this year. none. out of frustration about the fact that we continue to appropriate and spend money and yet will not do the tough work to actually pass a budget where you have to go through the grueling exercise of making that happen. so i'm very strongly supportive and thank the -- these two leaders in the house and senate for their leadership on this

issue. >> thank you. i want to thank all my colleagues for being here. this is a terrific turnout. and it's because honesty and budgeting always make sense but it particularly is needed right now. we're looking at record deficits, a soaring debt. yesterday the congressional budget office tells us that we're looking at trillion dollar deficits into the future and actually adding trillions of dollars more debt in the next ten years if we continue on this trajectory. and it is hurting the economy right now. it's like a wet blanket over the economy, creating uncertainty, unpredictability and keeping us from creating the jobs we all want to see. let me mention three things this would stop. first of all, right now, in congress, we typically evade spending caps simply by designating something an emergency. this would stop that process, one, by being sure you had to have not just a majority vote but a three-fifths vote to move forward with an emergency and better defining what an emergency is. it's a way, frankly, over the

years, congress has done a lot of spending it shouldn't have done. second, congress can cover up deficit limit breaches by shifting tax payments or shifting spending reforms a couple of days into a fiscal year. sometimes with the tax side, taxes are brought back to a fiscal year to show maybe within a five-year period or ten-year period there's more revenue than there really is. same with the spending side. sometimes spending is put off a few days into a fiscal year. this legislation would keep that from happening. it's a way in which over the years there have been a lot of gimmickry and increased spending that's been hidden from the american people. finally, one that i really like. it would stop congress from bailing out the highway trust fund by actually hiding the cost of the new spending. so when congress transfers funds into the trust fund and sometimes this is tens of billions of dollars, often it's not counted as an outlay. meaning it's not counted as new spending and yet it is. these were three examples i wanted to throw out as an example of what this good legislation would do. so i thank martha and jeff for promoting it. i'm encouraged by the great

turnout today. >> thanks for coming here. my name is ron johnson. an honest budget. what a concept. it's amazing that we actually have to pass a law. but the first thing we ought to do is we actually do in the senate, we have to pass a budget. it's the minimum the american people expect us to do. and so from my standpoint, i'm an accountant. my background is in business. this is the first time in 33 years in my dealing with a financial entity, and let's face it, the united states government is the largest financial entity in the world. i've been operating within this financial entity without a budget. so we need to certainly as senate republicans, hold the democrats' feet to the fire. senator harry reid's feet to the fire pass a budget on time by april 15th. i hope the members of the press will also hold the democrats accountable. thank you. >> i'm saxby chambliss from georgia. it is truly a shame we have