things we need. it will force savings in military spending, reallocating funding to meet future threats. it will reduce the rate of growth in health care spending while preserving and protecting our commitments to retirement and health care security. it proposing as does every bipartisan plan and even as endorsed by the business round table two weeks ago, the president's plan proposes a modest increase in revenues from the most fortunate americans. if you don't raise revenues, as part of the plan to restore fiscal balance, then you have to find another 1% of gdp or roughly $1.5 trillion over ten years from defense or social security or medicare benefits or education or low income programs. so as each of the bipartisan commissions have looked at this question have concluded, this is very hard to do without

sacrificing things that are fundamentally important. the republican budget proposals last year show quite vividly what it takes to restore sustainability if you decide not to raise any revenue. in their budget in order to preserve what are at present historically low rate effective tax rates for the top 2% of americans, and in order to sustain higher levels of defense spending than those the secretary of defense and the joint chiefs believe we need, in order to achieve those two objectives, those budgets proposed by republicans, proposed cuts that would dramatically reduce the level of future medicare benefits cut even more deeply into the safe net of low income americans and

cause further damage to programs that fund education and infrastructure and other investments. reducing the total size of what we call discretionary spending programs to 1.6% of gdp within ten years. which is a level more characteristic of pakistan or subsaharan africa. some republicans have proposed capping overall government spending at a fixed rate of gdp like 20%. some said 16%. some said 20%. but remember this, if you try to do that with 25 million americans becoming eligible for medicare and social security for the next 15 years, to achieve that cap within that would require you to effectively end the decades' long bipartisan commitment to maintain a guaranteed health care and pension benefit for retiring

americans or would leave us unprepared to defend the nation much less offer americans a better education. so remember these realities when you consider the competing proposals for restoring fiscal balance. and if the politics of this moment in this election year prevent us from addressing these charges before the election, both party haves to work together very quickly after the election to start to make some tough decisions. as you know at the end of 2012, at the end of this year, we faced a simultaneously expiry of large tax cuts and a large across the board cut in spending together which amount to about 5% of gdp. that should provide washington with a strong sin enttive for a pack oj after reforms.

we have a tough set of challenges as a nation. as tough as they are, they are d states. i would prefer those challenges to those of any economy anywhere in the world. we can afford the investments that are going to be important for future growth. we can address the challenges that will be brought on by future deficits. we are in a much stronger position today to meet the challenges than we are three years ago. i gave my wife some unwelcome attention a couple weeks ago when i was writing to express concern about amnesia about the financial crisis. and as we face the great political and economic ahead, remember how terrible that crisis was. remember that so many americans are still living with the scars and the damage of that crisis. remember when you listen to the

debate about taxes and medicare and medicaid, remember that even before this crisis, almost 20% of children in the united states were living in poverty and 40% of children born were born to parents covered by medicaid. and remember that the fortunates of children born in america today, the quality of the public schools they attend, the quality of health care they get the chance they have to go to college, depends still in this country today depends significantly on the wealth of their parents or on the color of their skin. and remember too that we're a country of great strength and resilience. we've successfully navigated the most dangerous phase of the worst economic crisis in

generations. we need to bring that same sense of national purpose to the many challenges ahead. that's going to require better results from our political system. no economy can be stronger over time that than the ability of its political leaders to come together and make some tough decisions. thank you vchl. [ applause ] >> thank you so much, mr. secretary. as you know you don't get off that easily. we're going to have a couple of our members join you and serve as questioners. the first is alan blinder a professor of economics and public affairs at princeton and has served as vice chairman of

the federal reserve board. the second is john lifski. the distinguished visiting scholar of the economics program of the advanced international studies at john hopkins anaging ty and recently left the director. if you have any questions that you might want to lob in here, you can email them to jan hopkins@questions@econclub.org. gentlemen. >> mr. secretary, thank you very much for being here tonight. one of my favorite geithner quotes is we save the economy,

but we lost the public in doing it. we spoke to the first half of that in your remarks but not the second. i'm not looking to draw you back then. but rather to get your thoughts on whether it's possible and if so how to get the public back. >> it's first remembering that people saw their lives up ended by a set of choices mostly they did not make. and they saw the world burning around them. a broad run on the first time in memory that people faced the risk of losing their savings or this depth of loss and wealth and employment. and the they saw the government forced to act to rescue the people they thought were responsible fairly on unfairly. and they were angry. understandably angry and scared

and frustrated. and i don't think there was any path through this that would have made it easy to do the things we needed to do to solve the crisis and at the same time win at that time broader public support. i say this because if you look back at the history of financial crisis, the reason why governments normally screw it up, the reason they normally wait too long to act or so tentative at the beginning is because they sit there and stare at the deep political cross they have to confront when they act. they wait and hope they can avoid acting. that's what causes financial crisis to be worse than they need to be. that's why it goes too far. it's that fear of political consequences that normally causes governments to be too tentative at the beginning. we were lucky as a country because we had people who were willing to do those tough things

early at a relatively early stage in the crisis and do it with really overwhelming force and it was necessary to do. it worked much more than we thought. again, if you wonder about that, you just need to look at the history of the path, the financial crises from the great depression on. oor look at europe today and look at the consequences of trying to adopt a more tentative, gradual slow approach. and i think if you're a -- if you're -- if you're president you want somebody who's president who's willing to say i'm going to put the politics aside and do what i think is necessary to fix it because ultimately i should be judged by our ability to make it better. so i think the only thing that you said what brings people back is for people to see the evidence of sustained gradual

progress and to have a chance to assess the alternative choices offered by competing politicians for where to take the country in the future. i think that i always like to say that life's about alternatives. and what's good about the debate we're having in the country today you see two very stark choices about what makes sense for the country in the future. that i think helps a little bit. when people have choice it's easier for them to assess. time will help. >> thank you. if i may this is going to sound like a three part question but it's really only one question. it comes back to talking about the long run budget deficit problem and in particular bowles

simpson. part one, can we realistically expect to solve the long run deficit problem without significantly higher taxes. i think you answered that? >> no. >> can we realistically expect to solve it without huge reductions in the future cost of health care, and then can we realistically expect republicans to accept the first and democrats to accept the second? >> you need as i said, you need the combination of modest revenues tied to reforms. if you look at the underlying drivers of those costs, you can achieve huge benefits in sustainability in making more affordable and pushing out solvency with what are modest changes in the trajectory of health care spending growth.

a lot of people look at the numbers today and thbz that looks beyond our capacity to come ten plait. seems to hard politically. i think that's mistaken. for the next ten years we're talking about finding agreement on 2% of gdp. half in taxes and half instead of -- those are very manageable adjustments for a country like the united states. much easy yr than we've seen countries around the world do in a very short period of time. so it absolutely is possible. it's necessary to do is sooner we do it is better easy to adjust to it the sooner you do it. it's understandable why they have to happen together. most americans who know they're going to bare a greater burden on the tax front want to be confident that those increased revenues go to a plan that is reducing deficits not sustaining

the unsustainable. most people want to believe that there's a bit of burden sharing across the american economy in that context. there's a compelling political reality and fairness reality. i think it's very hard to imagine either happening without them happening together. again, to think, why people will be reluctant to see their taxes rise they're always reluctant, understandably reluctant unless they think they're buying meaningful improvements in the long-term fiscal position. people are going to be reluctant to see the benefits cut unless they think the benefit cuts are not going to sustain tax rates we can't afford. they go together. there's no alternative. it's going to have so happen. it would be better for us if it happened sooner and be design in it than to happen too late

without the opportunity to give people time to adjust. >> thank you. >> secretary, i would like to turn to the international side of events for a moment. as you're aware the international monetary fund cut back its forecast for global growth this year and next year between a half and 3/4 of a per centre flekting the much slower growth in fact a modest recession here in europe. how do you assess the efforts that yourpian authorities have put in place and their chances of success and alied with that what views do you have about experts to expand the global financial safety net to protect in case of an adverse outcome? >> i think if you look back to where the world was in october, the europeans are making some progress. the combined effect of governments in italy a pretty

creative ecb a prod strategy to get the financial system stronger their fiscal kol pact, the combined effects of those actions have substantially calmed the really acute financial tensions of the last 18 months. that's very important because what they've done is make more convincing that want to take the catastrophic risk of the outcome out of the market. countries in europe t rates in is very important and very promising even though you can have a long period of weak economic growth in many parts of europe. i think that means that again relative to last fall, although again it's a tough and uncertain world i think the downside risk to growth around the world are significantly less than they were. again, for that to be sustained,

you've got to keep a close eye on oil and iran and gas prices but you've got to make sure europe keeps moving to sustain this progress. that's going to require them building a stronger financial hold and i believe they are on the path to doing. our view about the imf if you're demonstrating the world is willing to build a fronger financial firewall, then we think it will be easy and appropriate for the imf to go raise supplemental resources to demonstrate, too, if it's necessary for the imf to play a larger role in europe they're going to have the resources to do it without leaving the imf to help the broader membership of the fund. if europe moves in that front, they'll see the imf try to re-enforce that. >> thank you. let's taking a broader look, it's obvious from growth figures that the relative balance in the

global economy continues to shift towards the dynamic emergencying markets economy. that's likely the case for some time to come. in that context, looking to the medium term what do you think is the role of the u.s. economy, the u.s. dollar and the u.s. financial system? >> well, i think the u.s. is going to be an enormous beneficiary and huge participant in that long boom of growth ahead for those countries. you know, those countries on average are growing 5%, 6%, 7% for pretty long periods of time. europe and japan much lower growth potential. much worse demographics than we have. and we'll lie somewhere between those two. we have lucky as an economy we're so much more broad based and resilient and productive that we're in a very good position to benefit enormously from that growth ahead. but you see an important change in those basic growth strategies of china in particular because

they recognize as they grow to be so large they can't rely on export dominant dependent growth strategy as much as they have in the past and they have to shift to more domestic growth. for that to happen they're going to have to continue to let their exchange rate move to a more market oriented system and shift the broader set of incentives to encourage that shift. that's going to be a necessary part of making that transition sustainable. mostly promising for this country and if you look at really any major american company in any industry today you see them well positioned, better positioned than their peers in many countries to take advantage of that huge way of growth. >> if i may i'm going to cut you off here, my apologies, but dinner is about to be served. i want to thank you again. >> no emails?

>> i thank you very much just for those who are interested on april 11, the club is hosting a dinner for tung che wa, of hong kong, on april 23 the club is hosting a lunch for the president of deutsche es bank. mr. secretary, thank you for your insights. we appreciate you being here. enjoy your dinner. [ applause ]

>> we'll have more live events coming up. join us at 3:00 eastern for a hearing looking at the impact and treatment of traumatic brain injuries. federal, state and private efforts to prevent and treat such injuries will be examined. again that's live at 3:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span 3. the road to the white house winds through illinois tomorrow. join us for election results and speeches as the polls close here on the c-span networks. and our facebook question of the day involves the 2012 campaign. we're asking women voters in the republican party we welcome your comments at facebook.com/cspan. that's cspan with no hyphen. friday, the vice president's national security policy adviser

reinforced the administration's continued commitment to post war iraq. anthony blanken says while the conflict is over, work in the country continues. he added that since the war ended u.s. officials have increased their dialogue with iraqi leaders. his remarks came in a discussion at the center for american progress. the nearly 9-year conflict officially ended december 18, 2011. this is about 45 minutes. >> center for american progress, i'm rudy deleone, the senior vice president for national security. on behalf of all of my colleagues here at the center and with the national security program, i want to welcome you. for the first time in nine years the united states does not have troops fighting in iraq. president barack obama fulfilled his promise to end the war in iraq as part of an overall strategy to rebalance america's national security priorities. today we'll discuss this and

have this presentation on the end of the iraq war, and america's ongoing engagement yet in iraq. with anthony blinken, the deputy assistant to president obama and the national security adviser to vice president joe biden. our colleague brian katulus has done a brief paper, it's on the back paper for all of you who want to make sure you grab a copy. in it he's looking at how the end of the iraq war has strengthened overall u.s. national security. by dedicating more resources to the fight against al qaeda, to restore u.s. military readiness, to expand options to face other middle eastern threats, and to reduce the financial burden on defense spending and rebalance u.s. national security overall. again, that paper is on the back table, it's also online for those that are watching on c-span or the cap video feed. it was last december, speaking

at ft. bragg, north carolina that president obama stood before u.s. troops and this was his comment. quote, it's harder to end a war than to begin one. indeed everything that american troops have done has led to this moment of success. iraq is not a perfect place, it has many challenges ahead. but we're leaving behind a sovereign, stable, and self reliant iraq with a representative government that was elected by its people. we're building a new partnership between our nations, and we are ending a war not with a final battle but with a final march toward home. to continue the president's quote, this is an extraordinary achievement, nearly nine years in the making. and today the american people remember everything that the men and women of the armed forces of the united states did to make that moment possible. i think we'll have a very

interesting program here. and after we'll take questions from the audience. it's my great pleasure to welcome to the center for american progress, tony blinken. [ applause ] >> thank you all very much. good morning. it is great to be here at the center for american progress. it's particularly good to be here with you, rudy, colleague of many years and with john podesta, a great leader of the white house during the clinton administration and a remarkable leader and indeed founder of this institution. i appreciate very much the hospitality. like many in the administration including i suspect the dozens of cap alumni currently serving, we look to cap on a regular basis for sound policy ideas and analysis. so, it's a pleasure to have the opportunity to at least try to

return the favor this morning by giving you and sharing with you some of our thinking about iraq. sunday, as rudy said, will mark nine years since the start of the iraq war and three months since the last american troops crossed the border into kuwait ending one of our nation's longest and most divisive conflicts. the wisdom of going to war in iraq is something that is going to be debated for years. and i'll leave that debate to the historians. but what's beyond debate and what news coverage of iraq in my judgment too often failed to acknowledge, is that iraq today is less violent, more democratic, and more prosperous and the united states more deeply engaged there, than at any time in recent history. those of us who have been working on iraq for a long time including brian and larry of cap who have done remarkable work on it for years, they know, we know that this progress, while far from complete, was also far from

inevitable. it was the result of the extraordinary, awe inspiring success and sacrifice of our troops, resolve and resilience of the iraqi government and its people and the steady intense engagement of our diplomats and civilians which continues to this day. i appreciate the opportunity to take stock of how far we've come, how far iraq has come, the profound challenges that remain, and where we hope to go in building a new and more normal relationship between iraq and the united states. rudy, you quoted president obama a moment ago. indeed, when the president, vice president, came to office they came with a commitment, to end the war in iraq, responsibly. both parts of that sentence are critical, end the war, responsibly. it meant two things. it meant bringing our troops home after nearly a decade of war, and as important, it meant

helping the iraqis build a sovereign, stable, self-reliant country with a representative government that could become a partner in the region and not a safe haven for terrorists. on our first full day of work after the inauguration, president obama host add cabinet level meeting to begin charting a course toward that goal. a month later while the united states still had 144,000 troops in iraq, the president determined to withdraw u.s. forces from iraq cities by the summer of 2009, to end our combat mission and get down to 50,000 troops september 2010, and to fulfill president bush's security agreement with the iraqi government by with drawing all of our forces by december 31, 2011. and under the president's leadership, and that of vice president biden who the president asked to oversee our iraq policy and made eight trips to iraq since being elected we followed that path to the letter. at every significant step along the way many predicted that violence would return and iraq

would slide back into sectarian chaos. at least so far those predictions have proved wrong. over the past three years, violence in iraq has declined and remains at historic lows even after we completed the withdrawal of u.s. forces late last year. weekly security instances, the measure we used over the years fell from an average of 1600 in 2007 and 2008, to fewer than 100 today. that's been a consistent trend over the last couple of years. of course that's a credit to our troops first and foremost who succeeded at great costs in restoring a measure of stability when all looked to be lost, and who trained an iraqi army and security forces that is demonstrating the capability to provide basic security for its citizens. this did another thing. it created the time and space for what vice president biden has called the most important development in iraq in recent