stigsality of the fed, from the banking sector, political sector, china, europe, sociology of finance, consumer protection, consumer protection bureau and even whether the fed and central banks might have an impact on reducing violence in the world. we've got a full so i welcome you to come back. we won't be live stream on the fed but will be reporting and posting on the gw website so you can watch afterwards. this has been a fabulous start. as fabulous a start as any class you could imagine to begin but we've got a lot to go. some of the finest professors in the university will be in i encourage you to hang around. it's going to be a great ride. so thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for coming, and i look forward to the rest of the class.

so federal reserve chairman ben bernanke teaching the last of four classes washington university. we'll have some of that for you on our website, c-span.org. here's what's coming up. more live programming to tell you about. a series of panel discussions looking at the role of women at the 2012 elections hosted by a group called the femme nichlt majority and we have it live for you at 2:30, about a half hour from now here on c-span. take a look at the u.s. capitol now. today we've got news from both the house and senate. the house voting earlier by a vote of 266-158 to extend current transportation spending for an additional 90 days. that measure now goes to the senate for their consideration. and speaking of the senate, lawmakers there earlier today blocked the bill that sought to the repeal tax breaks for are gas and oil companies. we heard from congressional leaders earlier. that's comments from house

speaker john boehner from his weekly briefing and following that his democratic counterpart nancy pelosi. together their remarks run just over half an hour. good morning,. today the house is taking a significant step towards putting americans back to work, protecting our seniors and closing president obama the massive budget deficits. while senate democrats haven't pass add budget in nearly 1,000 day, republicans were addressing

the debt crisis directly including cutting spending, reforming our broken tax code and strengthening health and retirement security. our budget also reverses the president's policies that are driving up gas prices and calls for an all of the above approach to our energy needs. one month ago today during a conversation at the white house, i was encouraged by the president's willingness to discuss the possibility of working together on some of the bipartisan house-passed energy bills. many of these bipartisan proposals i have received support from the president's own jobs counsel. gas prices have gotten worse and the administration has taken absolutely no action. republicans aren't going to wait for the obama administration act on behalf of families and small businesses. yesterday the team launched the next phase of the american energy initiative focusing on

rising gas prices. this phase includes bills, for example, to responsibly increase energy production on federal lands and frees new regulations on refineries that will have a harmful impact upon our economy. our committee chairman are hard at work on both additional legislation to address this issue. i made clear earlier this year that oversight of the obama administration's policies on jobs, on the economy and its spending taxpayer dollars was going to be a priority. two weeks ago, chairman upton at the energy and commerce committee began looking into the department of energy's section 1603 grant program a solyndra-style stimulus program that offers cash payments to energy renewable company ps more than $10 billion, with a b, $10

billion has been spent on this and secretary chu says it created tens of thousands of jobs except there's no evidence to support that. the energy and commerce committee said a deadline for today for the energy department and treasury department to produce documents or information about what taxpayers got for their $10 billion. administrati failed to provide the committee with any information to justify this claim. the american people continue to asked question, where are the jobs? they deserve answers, and they deserve the truth. instead of wasting taxpayer dollars on failed stimulus programs we should be working together on common sense solutions to expand american energy production and address rising gas prices. with or without the democrats' cooperation, republicans here on capitol hill will continue to work towards these objectives.

>> i wanted to ask you about the highway bill on the floor today. a democratic leader said republicans are kicking the can down the road with the 90-day extension and call and you to pass your own long-term bills -- >> we expect after this 90-day extension, when we get back wet highway bill with our energy initve >> did you say -- are you saying what you're going to do, and i know in the previous bill that you had here, trying to put energy provisions in it, the minority leader was here a few minutes ago and said, "i don't know what miracle's going to happen between now and then" is this the bullet that's going to save us, really? >> we are working on putting together the final touches on that bill and it will be ready when we get back. >> on the highway bill, wondering why you decided to go back to the hastert rule when coming out as speaker you promised to bring that up as a full majority of both sides --

ree case this time. >> given the fact that we're dealing with the budtg at i thi responsible thing in meeting the statutory deadline, trying to make sure that we don't have stoppage of construction is really important. and so extending this highway -- current highway bill for 90 days is the most responsible way forward. we do want to get to the conference with this in it as quickly as possible. >> you famously are -- and we need comments from the chair in the house about not having proper -- [ inaudible ] isn't there a double standard? because there are member whose go on the floor who are not in proper attire. >> listen, i think the rules are enforced evenly. i've asked members on both sides of the aisle to leave the floor myself.

i know the sargent at arm has asked members to leave the floor. we expect all members to follow the rule, and the rules make it clear that members are to be on the floor in proper business attire. >> are you going to -- [ inaudible ] for hats on, cited when -- [ inaudible ]. >> i've not witnessed that, and i think the women members know that that's in violation of the rules. votes on the tax >> yes. >> mr. speaker what do you think it says of -- president obama this summer that last night the most bipartisan proposal based on simpson-bowles was only able to get 38 votes in the united states -- what does that say of the current state of american politics? >> it says it's pretty divided.

>> bipartisan -- overrunning bipartisan majority on both sides. why? >> listen, the members -- the members arre constituents for their votes, and while i support this bipartisan group and all of the efforts they've put into this, they were doing it in the middle of a pretty heated philosophical debate about which is the best way forward, and while they may have been working with each other, i don't know how much reaching out were doing to garner more votes. >> mr. speaker -- >> i have -- i would be supporting the house republican always looking for bipartisan solutions. the senate did send you an overwhelmingly bipartisan transportation bill. what is wrong with passing that -- >> well i think when you look at the pay-for the in there, what you see is, you see some what i call gimmicks in terms of how

it's paid for. secondly, they just run down the highway trust fund to virtually zero. which is going to -- may get them through the next year and a half but will cause a this has addressed again. so there are concerns with the bill, but i think that when we get to conference with the senate i'm confident we can resolve this. >> mr. speaker, what specifically with the bill, what specifically are the gimmicks? because i spoke to a senator today and she said nothing but spending, pork barrel spending. what would be -- what's the -- >> i don't think passes great d that when we get to conference. yes, sir? >> [ inaudible ]. >> we'll be fine.

>> mr. speaker, last september there was an issue with trying to offset staff emergency funding that was a contentious issue on both sides. do you intend to offset emergency funding come september, considering that your budget already lowers the levels from the bca? >> we will deal with that issue as we've dealt with it in the past. we're spending more money than what we're bringing in. we have a $1.3 trillion budget deficit. and we ought to be looking for ways to reduce spending and solve our deficit spending problem. and all of the old rules about, oh, well, we can't offset this and we can't offset that. listen, i've seen members with 1,000 excuses why something should be termed emergency spending and not offset. this is the american taxpayers' money, and we ought to be more protective of it. last one. >> [ inaudible ] the fact that

it fail and so overwhelmingly seems as though people are placing their bets that they'll be some sort of overwhelmingly unmistakable mandate from the voters in november, it be the ryan budget approach or the obama budget approach. isn't that like a dangerous assumption given the state politically? >> when the president are in our discussions and we would get hung up or have a disagreement over something, the president would look at me and say, john, that's what elections are for. yes, mr. president, you're correct. that's what elections are for. >> thank you.

good morning. here we are coming together before we leave for the easter gather here this the president will shortly be making a statement about energy and, at the white houtas senateg legislation on how we stop tax breaks for big oil and use those resources for renewable energy so that we can take ourselves out of a situation we are held hostage by an international price of oil. thiss of you may remember is very

important to me, as the speaker i instituted a select committee on the subject of energy independence, and i'm excited about the fact that the president and sethisand it's something that we will support them all the it's real stop the subsidies, use the money for renewables, and that will help us down the road. immediately we have to stop thes cornering the market on oil, and adding, experts say, almost 20%, same those same wall rice at street speculators from trying to sue against the dodd-fr th f cornering the market and the other point is that the republicans here, handmaidens of big oil in the congress, are trying to stop the funding

the commission that regulates derivatives andhe subject of energy. as you know, today we're debating the budget. simply said, the republican budget breaks the medicare guarantee, makes seniors pay more.more, to get less in benefits, while they gave over $300,000 tax breaks to the wealthiest people in our countrery. and it must be -- it hopefully won't evenerepublican side to p may. he o democratic budget is a statement about the education of our children, the economic security of their family, the creation of jobs, the retirement security of our seniors supportingand, again, doing so in a fiscally sound way. it's important to note just if

you -- you know, i mentioned the medicare 6,000 more for seniors, wealthy, but also ed -- higher education, 400,000 young people will be deprived of access to pell grants and another plus curtailed. at the same time the republican bill does nothing address the fact that on july 1 ins will double, will 4 todo 6.8%. the house democratic budget unmr addresses that and keeps it at 3.4%. so if you're a student, if you're a senior, if you're a member family, this budget is, should not be a statement that reflects your values.

it does not. that budget now talking about what else is on the floor today. transportation. the republican budget, think of this. we all recognize that a transportation bill is one of the biggest job. we all recognize over time it has always been bipartisan in its approach. that's because localities have worked together in a way to put forth projects that be compete and, again, create jobs, build the america, promotd the quality of life.inhe budget. as miserable as the republican bill is,hr-7, it doesn't even get funded by the republican budget. maybe that's a good thing, but apparently they don't have the votes for their own

transportation bill which the secretary of transportation has said has been ajo loser, bad -- so it's a ety -- god bl bad bill to begin with, and they don't even pla t well, let's come together about some transcription bill and adequately fund it. what they're doing today is, again, trying to kick the can 9 extension. these extensions are -- are bad. they lose jobs, and the departments ofortion, state departments of transportation report job losses from this kick the can down the road extension, 41,000 jobs in north carolina. that's the most. i gs geang on there. illinois, 4,500. maryland, 4,000. nevada, 4,000. michigan, 3,500. the list goes on and on, and the problem is, it's that there's no

confidence, no certainty. so when they kick the can down the road, the state, the private sector and the rest cannot go down that path. so, of course, there's a big difference between passing the senate bill, the and the house. there are many more jobs, 2 million jobs in whereas the house bill is a job loser. but separate and apart from that, just addressing kicking the can down the jo loser as we. and, again it affects small business. it costs the taxpayers more.aga projects, putting it down to the future where it will cost more as well. so it is athem to pass something that can go to conference, and then, an extension covers the time you go to conference and that should be a matter of weeks, and then it's over, but have the votes to do that, and so we're at the mercy.

in any event, whether it's energy and the need for us to address the price at the pump, and that issue, you've asked what i support. i support releasing or stopping oil going into the spro. i'm pleased to see because of the conversations the administration is having internationally, the price of crude is already coming down, and part of the oil issue, too, is, when you say you're going to stop the wall street speculation and perhaps you're going to release or not put oil in the spro, that -- that puts the speculators at unease about their speculations. so all of these things are connected, but they have one thing in common. the economic security of america. keeping america number one. whether it's adequately funding deficit in a fair it is way. not by giving hundreds of millions -- excuse me.

hundreds of thousands of dollars individually to higher income people in our country to the tune of hundreds, tens of billions of dollars, asking seniors to pay more. any questions? yes? >> if you a job loser. >> yes. >> yesterday there was a bipartisan bill that only 38 representatives voted for. i'm wondering howhat -- [ inaudible ]. >> i don't get your point. >> that bill was bipartisan and was told both sides of the aisle, that it included a lot of -- >> you know, i presume you're caricature of simpson-bowles? is that the bill you're talking advertised it as simpson-bowles, but they changed the spending and revenue provisions in it, and

not receive support on either side of the aisle, because it wasn't a good idea. we think, our house budget, our house democratic budget is a statement of national value does reduce the deficit, while investing in the future through education and the rest, and respecting our responsibilities to the american people, including our that bill did not have support because it wasn't what it was advertised to be. quite frankly, a day or two before i would hould be support the bill when it was presented to our caucus as an option, but what the particulars of it were, that's why i didn't vote for it. i can't answer while others did. we didn't havepe ale just voted voted. >> have you had any conversations or conversations were between you and the white house or colleagues about about health care, if parts, significant parts, individual mandates and other parts of the

by the supreme court? >> no. i think you know i'm pretty confident about the merits of the case, and- i didn't go ther myself. i did not hear, see the proceedings. i wish there were television cameras in court. in case any of you had that question, i'll anticipate it, so that we can arguments and the back and forth of it, but i'm a judicial review, honor the constitution in that regard. that's why we wrote our bill in a wastutional. so i still feel pretty confident about it, and if and when -- this game is not over. you -- march madness, what happens if your team doesn't win? well, wait a minute. let's have the game. and i have confidence in the solicitor general and a arguments from what i can see from the transcripts -- i don't know -- mr. conyers was pretty confident yesterday, but then

again he went to the court. i was pleased to send a number of member, representative of our caucus, and they were all impressed by our democracy and how the system works. and then the substance, we'll see what the decision is, but it was -- they were instiered. it was lovely to seeopleere so e the opportunity to go there. >> you talk about the -- tax loopholes for oil companies. >> yes. >> bipartisan work done by the research service that cost to oil companies can actually be passed on to consumers. why support a bill that could actually raise taxes when -- raise gas prices when gas prices are already so high? >> well, i think you speak to the bankruptcy of decency in the whole companies, the big five, making -- i'm not talking talking about the big five. makes tens of billions of dollar

as quarter in profits. record-breaking, historic. why do they need an incentive to drill? and i have had republicans say to me, you want to reduce the budget by $38 billion bythe tax subsidies for big oil. you could save that much by taking the money out of pell grants. it's a different value system here, as to how you do a budget. and so i think that keeping america number one is very important. honoring the re -- rewarding an indu billions of dollar as quarter, the five companies, making billions of dollar as quarter and saying if we don't, they willd ss it on is stoelgtotally irresponsible their part and does not argue for giving them a reward in my view. yes, sir? >> do you think that bobbi -- >> the hoodie? didn't i talk about that

yesterday? remember the pant suits and all that? i think that bobby rush deserve as great deal of credit for the courage he had to go to the floor in a hoodie, knowing that he would be put, told he was out of order and he quickly left the floor. he didn't -- he wasn't contentious about it, but heatt situation in our country that needs to be addressed, in a way that a man in a suit and tie might not be able to do. >> can i follow-up on that question? yesterday you didn't seem concerned about the dress e. ha since you've been here. colleagues is writing a letter to the speaker asking him to enforce the dress code across the board evenly. do you think it currently is being board? >> i don't pay a whole lot of attention to it, to tell you the truth. i mean, i really don't. i do thinkf us will tell you th

biggest honor we can of have in congress is to represent our districts, to doo dignity and that includes how we come to the floor. sometimes member, just coming in they may vote in the thing like back of the roomthoua suit, but about about what they say on the floor, and the policies that they put forth that are relevant to the lives of the american people. this, i think, falls into the fairly irrelevant, but all of us have the responsibility to serve with dignity, and, yes, if you're going to enforce it, enforce it. but don't be selective about it. i still wonder why women can't wear hats on the floor, but -- ? >> do you think calling up again -- do that congress should publish hearings are e situation --

we talking about an investigation that is taking place. i think that that's an issue in the justice system, and if that doesn't seem to be working, then consider some other options, but i'm pleased that the inig yes. okay. yes, sir? >> so just t -- vote against the 90 day -- >> well, they can do whatever they want, but i do think that it is irresponsible and it's not -- it's -- it costs jobs. d duty, not to have done this bill before. kwla what's going to happen after we come back? what miracle is going to happen? what enlightenment is going to

come upon us that they will finally be able to pass a stl pe bill. let's go back to december when we had the pay roll tax. the senate democrats and republicans supported it. the president supported it. the house democrats supported it. only the republicans painteding themselves in the extreme who opposed it and opposed it and opposed it until handle. they're doing the exact same thing. senator barbara boxer, senator imhoff, could we go the, to a fuller array of opinion in the this legislation bipartisan, 74 members voted fo. it would have been 75. three quarters of senate voting for this legislation. the president willing to sign. house democrats ready to support and yet other republicansress, bring it up. we have asked to have a vote on it