washington. around the country on xm satellite radio channel 119. >> if there's one thing i know about new hampshire, it's that your political bull detector is pretty keen. it's pretty sharp. you know that we can't just drill our way top lower gas prices. there are no quick fixes or silver bullets. if somebody tells you are, they're not telling you the truth. >> the president on the campaign trail talking about policy issues in new hampshire. a state, by the way, that the democrats have targeted for the president's own re-election effort. the vice president biden in iowa, another key state for the democrats. this coming just a few days before the republicans votinging in super tuesday, and welcome to hour two of "washington today." i'm steve scully. we'll have more on the president's comments about gas prices, what's new in the

president's speech and how he's framing the debate against democrats in this election year. let's turn our attention to some foreign policy issues, first from syria in what is being called a tactical retreat, syrian rebels are pulling out of the key part of homs, the city under siege for a month by syrian troops. the government quickly announcing that it will let the red cross into the neighborhood, another 24 people reportedly died today in homs. and the next member of the european union could be serbia. it has formally accepted a candidate to become a member of the european union, the announcement a dramatic turn around for a country that just over a decade ago was viewed by manifations as a pooh ryia. it was bombed by nato to prevent a crackdown on ethnic albanians. andrew breitbart passed away, he was 43 years old, a conservative blogger who helped contribute to the success of the drudge report and the huffington report. he collapsed shortly after midnight today outside of his home in los angeles.

and gasoline prices news today from the aaa, increasing 30 cents a gallon last month and the president talking about gas prices today in nashua new hampshire at a community college. david boyer will join us in a couple minutes and writes for the washington times with this headline, the president saying it is time to end tax breaks for big oil. here's more of the president's speech in new hampshire earlier today. >> we've got to keep investing in developing every available type of american made energy. and this means that we've got to set some priorities. we've got to make some choices. first, while there are no short-term silver bullets when it comes to gas prices, i've directed my administration to look for every single area where we can make an impact and help consumers from helping to relieve bottlenecks in the places like the one we've got in oklahoma to making sure speculators aren't taking advantage of what's going on in

the oil markets and we're going to keep on announcing steps in the coming weeks every time we find something that can provide a little bit of relief right now, we're going to do it. but over the long-term, an all of the above strategy requires right incentives. and here's one of the best examples. right now, 4 billion of your tax dollars, $4 billion, subsidizes the oil industry every year. $4 billion. now, these companies are making record profits right now. tens of billions of dollars a year. every time you go to the gas tank or fill up your gas tank, they're making money. every time.

now, does anyone really think that congress should give them another $4 billion this year? of course, not! it's outrageous. it's inexcusable. i'm asking congress, eliminate this oil industry giveaway right away. i want them toe vote on this in the next few weeks. [ applause ] let's put every single member of congress on record. you can stand with the oil companies or you can stand up for the american people. you can keep subsidizing a fossil fuel that's been getting taxpayer dollars for a century, or you can place your bets on a clean energy future. so i'm asking everybody here today, anybody who's watching at home, let your member of congress know where you stand, will you do that? [ shouts of yes ] >> because i know where i stand, new hampshire.

i know where i stand on this. we want to have successful oil companies that are able to get the oil that we have in our country, but we also understand that our future requires us to make investments in clean renewable energies and that has to start now. we can't wait. we can't wait until gas is skyrocketed more and people are desperate. we need to start making those investments now. and most of you guys agree. that's why -- that's why you're putting your time, that's why folks here at this community college are learning about building cars and repairing cars that use less oil, powered with alternative fuels. like natural gas. that's why the city of nashua is purchasing a new fleet of trash trucks that run on natural gas. they're going to go cleaner, they're going to last longer. they're going to be cheaper to

fill up. i saw one of them. it was a good-looking truck. and it put a smile on the mayor's face because she knows she's saving money, she's saving taxpayer money. good job, mayor. >> the president in nash youia new hampshire in the southern part of the state near the massachusetts border. david boyer of the washington times writing that the president's visit to a battleground state intended to show he is on the side of average americans feeling pain at the pump. republicans however saying that the president was attempting to deflect attention from his failed energy policy. joining us here in washington is white house reporter david boyer of the washington times. thanks very much for being with us. >> thanks for having me, steve. >> first of all, let's cut to the chase in terms of what the president said today. it didn't seem to be a lot of new information. but reinforcing his argument that he has been making over the last couple of weeks. >> that's right. the only thing really new is that gas prices have gone up 30

or 40 cents a gallon in the last month and that the president wants to reinforce that notion in the public's mind that he's on their side and he's trying to do something about it. he went to new hampshire today to call for what he's been proposing for several years now, and that's ending about $4 billion in tax breaks for oil and gas companies. >> right now, one of the conventional wisdom thoughts in this campaign is that the economy appears to be turning around, unemployment rate is on its way down. things appear to be better in most parts of the country which is beneficial to the president and his own re-election effort. with a couple of caveats. and one of those caveats is the price of a gallon of gasoline which could continue to hurt the economy and cost the president. >> that's very true. i mean, any company that has a fleet of trucks to deliver their goods obviously is feeling the cost of the rise in gas prices and the administration also seems to be of two minds here.

they're saying you know on the one hand, we're doing all we can to diversify and to grow the economy through you know, you've heard over the last six eight months all the proposals that the president has tried to you know create jobs, but on the other hand, you know, the white house is also saying well, gee, as the economy gross and that increases the demand for gasoline and fossil fuel products, increased demand raises the price. we're kind of a victim of our own modest success here as the recovery is going on. and they add obviously india's growth and china's growth and that worldwide demand is just going up and that's creating problems. and then you have obviously the tensions with iran and the strait of hormuz contributing to the rising gas prices. >> one of the quotes from your piece, it's available online at washington times.com i want you to react to is from senator jeff sessions, an alabama republican.

he called the president's speech another defeatist address on soaring gas prices. a defeatistcracy? >> pretty strong language. obviously he's no fan of president obama but he's an influential republican and a senior member of the senate budget committee. and he's saying you know, america has untapped vast untapped sources of fossil fuel that we could be drilling for and a lot of them are on federal land that the president could -- an civil to manage at his discretion. he could begin to lower gas prices right now if he allowed you know an expedited drill and permitting process beyond but he won't. >> let me ask you about another political sidebar story to all of this, the comments of steven chu, the energy secretary. who testified on capitol hill yesterday on the issue of gas prices, newt gingrich today calling on the president to fire secretary chu citing the

congressional testimony in which he said the overall goal was to decrease u.s. dependence on oil, not to lower the price. >> yeah, that comment really stirred a lot of reaction in washington. he was speaking at a subcommittee of the appropriations panel in the house, and he was asked by republican lawmaker is the overall goal of the administration to lower gas prices. and secretary chu said no, our overall goal is to you know, increase domestic production and to you know, increase national security, but and to diversify sources of energy but it's not necessarily to lower gas prices. and the secretary had another appearance at another hearing in the house today, and he sort of changed his tune a little bit and said you know, we definitely feel the pain of every american and every business when it comes to gas prices going up, and we really want to try to not only

slow the rise of gas prices but to reverse it seems like they were getting a lot of heat over his comments and as you said, newt gingrich even called today for the president to fire him, which i don't think is going to happen. >> how much pressure is there within the white house, you're over there all the time, from administration officials in dealing with this issue when you have democratic leaders like nancy pelosi saying open upr to price of a gallon of gasoline in some states like california where the price of premium unlead is well over $5 a gallon, here in the mid-atlantic anywhere from $3.80 and to $4.10. it has increased 30 cents just in the month of february per gallon. >> i think the white house is feeling a lot of pressure from their own democratic members totach into the strategic petroleum reserve. jay carney, the president's press secretary was asked directly about that yesterday at the white house briefing and he said flat out, i'm not going to

comment about the spr and you know, obviously, the white house is cognizant of the facting it could look like a desperation move and kind of risky for national security purposes and they don't want to go there, but you know, depending on what happens, obviously, traditionally gas prices rise during the summertime and everybody's concerned that gas prices are spiking so much now in february and january and march when they're usually at a low point. >> when the president said there is no silver bullet, no easy answers, how does that play among the electorate? >> well, i haven't seen any polling on it, but you know, i think everybody, you know, every time you go to the gas pumps with your suv and it costs you 50 or $60 to fill up the tank. >> that's cheap. sometimes it's $80 or $100. >> you want an immediate solution. so i don't know how it's going to turn out this year, but democrats are definitely worried

that this is -- things have been looking very good for the president in recent months since he's been on his jobs, passing his job bill now, promoting the middle class steam. and really, the biggest fly in the i don't knowment for him is these gas prices. >> we're talking with david boy ker of the washington times, vice president bide in iowa, the president today in new hampshire and tonight he is in new york city, the rnc taking aim at the 100th fund-raiser that the president has had since being in office with his goal for re-election. >> he's expected to 4 or $5 million tonight at four fund-raisers. he's still you know, very effective fund-raiser and the republicans know they're way behind the curve as far as their 2012 campaign goes in that respect. >> david boyer, white house reporter for the washington times. his work available online. thanks very much for being with us. >> thanks, steve. >> this is "washington today." meanwhile the speaker of the house john boehner also asked

about gas prices and the transportation bill issues that came up at his thursday news conference on capitol hill. >> mr. speaker, on gas prices, there's been a accord fated effort and messaging this week especially among some of your republican colleagues saying that the president's policies are designed and intended to drive up energy prices to drive up gas prices. do you believe that? >> well, with secretary chu who's made it pretty clear that his goal is to have higher energy prices. i think that's what a lot of our memberses were queueing off of. i'm not sure that the president believes that higher energy prices are what he wants. and clearly, after my discussion with him yesterday, i think he would prefer to see lower gas prices. at least for election day. >> speaker boehner, democrats including nancy pelosi just, she just mentioned that using the strategic petroleum reserve would be a way to lower gas prices. are you supportive of the idea?

>> it did not appear to me yesterday that the president believed that that was true. when just releasing of spro without coordination with our allies around the world, all it does is shift where the supply is coming from. so it didn't appear to me that the president believed that using spro would have any meaningful effect on gas prices. >> mr. speaker. >> you guys said the senate bill was unadequate because it was two years the highway bill. now you're readying a bill that's 18 months. >> there is no brighting of a bill. >> so 18 months is not in the cards? >> apparently our members don't think too highly of it. i would only look at it as a fallback measure. we ought to do this the right way. we've had five year, six-year reauthorizations of the highway bill. i think it's important for the states and for those who want to invest in this arena to have a

broad horizon so they know where we're going and a five-year bill is the best way to get there. whether we can achieve that given the differences we'll see. >> the comments of the speaker of the house john boehner as he spoke to reporters earlier today. let's turn our attention to the senate. voting today 51-48 that essentially killed an amendment that would weaken the president's policy requiring employers to provide birth control to their employees. the senate voting essentially to table the measure from senator roy blunt. he sponsored the amendment. a republican from missouri. it would have let any employer opt out of the health care coverage mandates that violates their religious or moral beliefs. we'll break down the vote in just a couple of minutes to show you how some democrats and republicans votes on the measure. first the debate on the floor, senator david vitter is a republican from louisiana. >> mr. president, the arguments made on the other side when you

look at them carefully just don't hold water. first of all, there's president obama's so-called accommodation, so-called compromise which isn't an accommodation and isn't a meaningful compromise at all. what did he say? he said okay, we're not going to make americans persons of faith, religious institutions buy coverage that they will have moral quauxs with. we are merely going to make the insurance provider provide that coverage whether the customer wants it or not. well, mr. president, that is a completely superficial, completely meaningless word game. the insurers is providing this how? what payment is supporting it? the only payment the insurer is getting is from the customer who objects to the coverage. so who's supporting it? who's paying for it? clearly, this is just a word game.

if it weren't clear enough for the typical person or institution involved, what about institutions and there are many of them which are self-insureded? what about, say, the university of notre dame? catholic university, catholic institutioning? it doesn't go to an insurance company to buy slirns. it's self-insured. so that word game doesn't even work on the surface there. and those cases number in the hundreds or thousands around the country. and that is a clear example of how that so-called compromise or accommodation is merely a slight of hand and a word game. another argument which the other side has made in this debate, mr. president, is that somehow correcting this situation through the blunt amendment or through similar measures will shut down access to these

services. that's just patently not true. these services, these medicines and other treatments are widely available in every community across the country at little cost or no cost for folks who can't afford it. and that's not going to change. it's absolutely not necessary to tear away religious liberty, violate conscience rights of millions of americans with that argument in mind, just isn't true. that's why, mr. president, respected religious leaders like cardinal designate timothy know land, president of the u.s. conference of catholic bishops have argued strenuously, passionately against this mandate. cardinal designate know land has said "never before has the federal government forced individuals and organizations to go out into the mark place and buy a product that violates their conscience." this shouldn't happen in a land

where free exercise of religion ranks first in the bill of rights." >> senator david republican from louisiana on the floor of the house earlier in the day. the senate today voting 51-48 that kill this had amendment sponsored by senator blunt. now, three democrats voting with the republicans against this amendment. those democrats joe manchin of west virginia and bob casey of pennsylvania, both up for re-election this year. ben nelson of nebraska who is retiring at the end of this year and a note about the senator olympia snowe who announced she'sal retire and she was the only republican to vote in favor of table ling the amendment. here's more of the floor debate. senator patty murray is a democrat from washington state. >> it is terrible policy. it will allow any employer in america to cut off any preventive care for any religious or moral reason. it would simply give every boss

in america the right to make the health care decisions for their workers and their families. it is a radical assault on the comprehensive preventive health care coverage that we have fought so hard to make sure that women and men and families across this country have. if this amendment were to pass, employers could cut off coverage for children's immunizations if they on the to that. they could cut off prenatal care for children born to unmarried parents if they object to that. mr. president, the american people are watching today. young women are watching today. is the united states a senate a place where their voice will be heard and their rights will be stood up for? we have watched this assault on women's health care for more than a year now. when a year ago, almost at this time to this day, we were working to make sure we kept the

government open by putting together our budget agreement. in the middle of the night, all the numbers were decided. all the issues were decided. we were ready to move forward. within hours to make sure that our government did not shutdown. what was the last issue between us and the doors of this government closing? the funding for planned parenthood. i was the only woman in the room. and i stood up with those men and i said no, we will not give away the funding for this over this budget. and the women of the senate the next morning stood tall. we gathered all of our colleagues tooth. we fought back and won that battle. but those trying to take away the rights of wix and to make their own health care choices and to have access to contraception in this country today have been at it every day since. we are not going to allow a panel of men in the house to make the decisions for women in this country about their health care choices. we're not going to allow the blunt amendment that is before us today to take away that

right. we believe that this is an important day. and in fact, mr. table the blunt amendment and to tell women in this country everywhere that we stand with them in the privacy of their own homes to make their own health care choices. >> in fact, as senator murray had requested, the amendment was tabled. but it remains a political issue for democrats and for republicans, the u.s. conference of catholic bishops also contending they could take this case to the courts.

today in iowa, vice president biden acknowledged that the administration "screwed up the first iteration of the contraceptive mandate." that's the headline from arnie par rins writing the story for the hill newspaper. this measure was eventually changed to please angry catholic leaders writes the newspaper. the vice president who by the way is catholic said that the second version of the rule is where it should have been in the first place. it was prompted by a question from one of the students. here's how the exchange unfolded. >> i have to raise this question for my family because you were introduced as a faith based man. propose obama was quoted in a commencement address at the university of notre dame saying let's honor the conscience of those who disagree was abortion and draft a sensible clause to make sure all of our health care poses are grounded in clear science and ethics. mr. vice president, why did you disregard the statement in the

hhs mandate forcing all faith based employers to provide contraceptives for the very thing that violates their conscience? i believe this mandate violates the most basic civil liberties and contradicts the very thing that the president believed to be true. do you agree? >> no, but let me explain. when i was in the congress, i was one of the guys, the co-author of the religious freedom act. i do believe and have believed and i was the one that was tasked to meet with the national conference of bishops and others and cardinal dolan to talk about this. the fact of the matter is, the ultimate resolution of this problem is where it should have been in the first place. which was that we had not their rowed what they call the conscience clause to the phrase used to the steeple.

meaning that the conscience clause some wanted to apply only to an actual church and the employees of that church that in fact were employed in the practice of that religion within that church. not extended to, for example, catholic hospitals. the end result was finally turned out, which should have been what we tried to do in the first place. no catholic or religious institution running a large institution like that is not directly related to the functioning of the church, the steeple but like hospitals and universities, none will have to pay a single solitary penny for reproductive services. not a single penny. the conscience clause is being honored in its literal sense. what is happening now is, that we have been able to provide

what was hard to set up, it got screwed up in the first iteration. is that any hospital no matter where it is, no matter who runs it, profit or non-profit, religious-based or otherwise, has to provide insurance to their employees like everybody else does in the country. or pay a penalty for not providing insurance for employees. that comes out of the affordable health care act. that will still pertain but the insurance companies, because quite frankly, it's cheaper for them, they will provide, not the institution, separate and apart from the policy that the catholic hospital, for example, provides to their nurses, doctors, janitors, technicians, et cetera, the insurance companies will provide for anyone who figuratively raises their hand and says i also want coverage for contraceptive care.

it will be automatically provided. that has been worked out and negotiated and there's a simple reason for it. they say well now, some of you and by the way, i liked ronald reagan. i knew him well. he was a hell of a guy. i see your sweater there. it looks better on you than it would on me too, but look. the problem is that it's real simple here. is that we're in a position that no matter how anybody tries to make it that the vast majority of american women are entitled to, entitled to access to contraception. if they choose. and we believe they should not be denied that access and that every insurance policy should have that coverage if the woman wants that coverage. so that's we've done both. we've guaranteed that women who cannot afford contraceptive coverage which is expensive on a

monthly basis will now have it in any policy provided and that no religious institution will have to pay if it vi lays their conscience for that coverage. okay. >> the comments of vice president joe biden. he was in iowa today taking questions from students and one of the questions about the contraceptive issue which has become a political lightning rods for republicans and democrats again from the hill today, the senate rejecting an amendment put forth by senator blunt that would have placed new restrictions. the issue is not going away for either political party. as we said at the top of the hour, andrew breitbart passed away suddenly. according to hollywood reporter, he spent his final hours much like the way he lived his life talking passionately about politics. the 43-year-old conservative pundit, the founder of breitbart reports and also one of the leading contributors to the drudge report and