reduced for structures correct. i categorically refuse to accept a department -- combat and commanders. we have also had considerable discussion on maintenance. special access programs from depost statute, returning the nation to long standing policy. the mark also states key law and key terms of reference. and vesting the current law in the department of defense. as to our forestructure, this mark contains funding to obtain three missile cruisers in fiscal year 2013 that the navy proposed

to retire well before the end of their expected service life. by prohibiting the dod from expending funds to activate or restore these assets, we found a cost effective way to maintain needed naval capability. in this year's budget request, we note that the department is reducing it's military and civilian workforce by increasing it's contractor improvements. to create a policy for total force management. in this bill, we direct gao to provide their assessment of what measures dod is taking to appropriately balance its current and future workforce, i have always supported objective information as to prerequisite to our decisions.

in conclusion, mr. chairman, i want to thank the members of our committee, especially our ranking member ms. allen for her help in providing the unyielding support for the men and women who so heavily rely on our efforts. i also want to personally commit the subcommittee staff who i believe to be the most professional and dedicated in congress and the personal staffs of our subcommittee members. thank you mr. chairman for your leadership and i yield back. >> the chair now recognizes the gentle lady from guam. >> i thank you mr. chairman and i want to take this opportunity to thank the committee chairman, mr. forbes for the fine working relationship that we have. and again, i thank all of the staff who have put countless hours into helping us develop this bill and i thank them for all their hard work. our mark continues this

subcommittee's tradition of making sure that our men and women in uniform are provided with the resources to be well trained and equipped. although the war in iraq is over and as we begin a drawdown of the surge forces in afghanistan, we continue to face charges with our readiness. our mark will support the department's reset efforts which are important to addressing readiness challenges in other global commands, particularly in the united states pacific command. i am pleased that we are reauthorizing the multitrades demonstration project for depot employees, expanding the product improvement pilot program to all the other military departments and extending for oneeaemems wo i also appreciate that our mark provides authorization for more than $19 billion in funding for

military construction projects including military housing. as we pivot to the asia pacific region, it is critical that we have a lay down plan that is resilient and sustainable and i believe we're moving in that direction. i appreciate the committee's continued support for the strategic realignment in the asia pacific region. additionally our mark supports energy improvements in our department of defense which are very important in the future security of our nation and has some important environmental provisions that enhance the readiness of our military. however, and as i have stated in premark meetings, i have some concerns about our mark. the mark prohibits the requirement of the class cruisers at the cost of nearly $630 million in this fiscal year

only. and what's most concerning about this amendment is the unfunded mandate that it places on the navy in the future years. we live in a time where we must make difficult decisions. our action also deny the navy the ability to reinvest these dollars into a newer more agile, more capable network centric fleet which is necessary to meet our strategic goals. i feel this vision is more focused on parochial needs than the good of the u.s. navy. i do support the underlying mark and i urge it's adoption and i yield back. >> some of the debate from earlier today discussion in the house armed services committee of the 2013 authorization bill, we are going to move our coverage over to cspan 2 when the economy gavels back in shortly.

so you can watch that on cspan 2 or watch it online on cspan.org. >> furthermore i remain optimistic about the future of indiana and the united states of america. the news media and political leaders spend a great deal of time talking about what is broken in our country, and to some degrees, that is the nature of their business. but we should also have confidence that the unique american experiment is alive and well and our political system still can work. >> tuesday night, long-time indiana republican senator richard luger lost to primary challenger richard murdock. look back at senator luger's time in the senate. all online, archived and searchable at the cbs span video library. in a few moments "new york

times" columnist paul krugman on the economy. in 45 minutes the state opening of british parliament. after that the future of the federal reserve. >> i had my ambition to walk where john smith and pocohanas walked. this makes a rectangular space. pocahontas marries john ralph, so i guarantee you, i'm standing a little deeper than she was, but this is from pocahontas was standing when she got married. >> since it's 1994 rediscovery of the colony has yielded more than -- and then join in the

conversation with william kelso answering your question. part of american history tv this weekend on cspan 3. now "new york times" columnist paul krugman from his new book on the economy. from washington journal, this is 45 minutes. >> good morning. >> let's start with the title of your book, in surveys economists say we're in a bit of a economic recover, they use the term recession. but you have that dramatic phrase depression "end this depression now." a recession is when things are headed down and a depression is when things are down. we have basically been moving sideways for a couple of years now. it's a terrible situation out there, almost 4 million

americans have been out of work for more than a year. so this is an ongoing really bad situation, which has been going on for years, has every prospect of continuing, it's not as bad as the great depression, it's not as bad as the 1930s, but this is a depression, it is a long period of substandard economic performance that's doing a lot of human damage to the country. >> you say it's the unemployed people who deserve better. why? >> it's because they didn't do anything wrong, first of all. we talk about a morality play, we overborrowed, we had excess. but the people who had jobs, they didn't do that, that's not their fault. and it's gratuitous, this thing

could be solved very, very easily. i took a look at what people were saying in the 1930s, and you're hearing a lot of what people are saying now, this is long-term, we need structural reform, and then came the buildup, not even world war ii, but an increase in government spending in preparation for world war ii. and just like that we were back to full employment. so this is what we could do right now. the bad thinking and political deadlock among our elite is keeping millions and millions of americans in a state of desperation. >> our guest is paul krugman, he's the author of "end this depression now." democrats 202-737-0001, republicans 202-737-0002. i have a -- the win of francois

hollande defeating nicolas sarko sarkozy, but "the wall street journal" looks at it and says this is actually a response, not calling for sort of more freedom and sort oflesses s oes o s oe austerity. demonizing successful french businessmen, complaining that germans work too hard and trying to pin much of the blame for economic troubles on immigrants. >> we basically had in pretty much all the western world and certainly within europe, we have had exactly what conservatives want. we have had austerity programs, sharp cuts of government spending through much of europe. we have had really a turn towards trying to have less government and trying to have

less support for the economy which has been a disaster. and the response is, well, but you're not doing it right, what can you say? i actually don't think the vote in france that was particularly, that the populous had a clear idea of which way it wants to do, but the there is not working. so it was a throw the buns out. but it was the right response, but it's up to the leaders to come up with better solutions here and there. >> is it as simple as is u.s. tried stimulus and europe tried usst st austerity. >> this was not an adequate program and i said it, this is going to look like a failure and people are going to feel that the whole idea of stimulus is really discredited when we actually never really tried it.

and you have had a lot of austerity. that said the europeans have done it on a much aggressive scale and the results are clear. if you had any question on whether cutting government spending was bad for the economy when it was already depressed, your question has been answered, just look at those austerity questions in europe. we have just carried out an unethical human experiment on real populations and we ju-- >> good morning. >> caller: my comment, i hear republicans just like the guy that was on before you were, talking about rising medical costs and i used to be a republican, as a matter of fact, i spoke to mitch mcconnell a couple of weeks ago and he said

why did you switch parties, but the republicans never did a darn thing to try to control health care costs. i think health care costs are absolutely going to destroy the country, not to mention the fact that americans aren't taking care of their health. you go in a hospital now, it's $100,000 for four or five days. you know, i know the president tried to tackle it, it wasn't handled real well, but my brother for example, his insurance goes up every year. everybody's insurance keeps going up. and the thing with the republicans, they preach, just like the guy before you was talking about gas prices, what do republicans want to do, they want to continue oil subsidies. but my question is what can be done on these health care costs? i don't see anything happening, because i don't see both sides coming together. if anything, it's going to get more partisan, but i just know that health care costs are absolutely going to destroy this

economy. >> health care costs are a tough issue and they're also -- the first thing you need to do is give this economy the help it needs, give the private sector the breathing space in a so support from the government temporarily so we can get back to full employment that will help a lot. the interesting thing about the republican position there is that they are actually dedicated to the proposition that the only answer is something that has never worked anywhere, which is rely on private insurance markets. private insurance has never been a successful way of controlling health care costs anywhere. public health care, there are lots of different ways to do health care, there's a swiss version, there's a french version, there's a british version, all of them actually do a much better job of containing kw costs than ours does, no -- the president's health care plan, he

threw together a lot of stuff, because he had to keep the private insurance companies in the mix. but it's a really good start. once we got the principal down there that everybody is guaranteed health coverage and that containing health care costs is going to be done by containing costs and not by just throwing more people into the abyss, into lack of insurance. that's the right way to go. different question, for this book, i have a book now, i can write lots and lots and i have about those issues, but right now i'm saying the immediate priority is to get those americans back to work. >> you have a sense of looking at the deficit and the concern focus on reducing the debt, bringing down the deficit and you call it the folly of a short-term deficit focus. so give a long-term focus on deficit reduction and a short-term deficit focus. the economy has changed from

stimulus to deficit reduction. >> the greeks have got a lot to answer for, because the greek disaster made everybody think that we're about to turn into -- even among the europeans, greece is unique. they were just fiscally irresponsible in the good years. everybody else was just caught up in a fiscal crisis. it's a terrific mistake for a couple of reasons, one is that now you don't want to be cutting deficit spending because -- wait until the private sector has paid down some of the debt it got during the bubble, and then the private sector can take up the slack. but not now. i'm all for worrying about u.s. debt, worrying about the u.s. budget for ten years from now. by all means we should have a

plan, if we can agree on one, we should have a plan to control our budget over the next 10, 20, 30 years, but now is not the time to cut spending and it turns out pretty much overwhelming evidence right now, cutting spending right now which is what the republicans want to do and a fair number of democrats is a losing strategy even if the only concern you have is with the budget. because if you cut spending, it depresses the economy further which reduces revenues and it also does lots of long-term damage, we have got 4 million people who have been out of work for a year. we have got college graduates unable to find jobs, or if they can find jobs, they find jobs that make no use of their education. those are the future taxpayers of america. so by doing these ill advised spending cuts now, not only are we making the economy worse, we're actually reducing future revenue, we're making the long

run budget picture worse rather than better. this stuff we're doing right now is hurting us in the long-term as well as the short-term. it's -- the example i use, in the middle ages doctors thought they could cure people by bleeding them. and when they bled them, they got sicker and that means even more bleeding. >> let's go to darrow, louisiana. >> caller: i'm actually a part of the human party. but there's a couple of historical scientific things that we could do to turn our economy afternoon right now. the first diesel motor was made to run off of hemp oil. now it costs $5 a gallon to produce a gallon of hemp diesel a that we could put in our diesel matters with no

modification. if we were to take one step further and go to the marijuana plant which produces five times the seeds that hemp does. we could go and make a gallon of diesel. >> that's -- you used to have chicken in every pot, now it's pot in every engine. that's fine. lots of things, we should be trying lots of stuff. but, you know, one thing i try to say in "end this depression now" is that in a lot of ways the question of how to boost the economy is easier now than it was three years ago when president obama was new in office. then it was what are the projects, what are we going to spend on? now we have this severe -- we have laid off hundreds of firefighters, policemen, we have deferred maintenance, i live in new jersey, just by restarting that, by providing the federal funds that will allow the states

and localities to go back to their usual business, doesn't require anything innovative, it doesn't require anything speculative. by all means, let's push for alternative energy, all kinds of things, first and foremost, put those schoolteachers back to work, good for education, good for our children and good for the economy. >> on twitter, where the money should come from paying for teachers and firemen, raising real estate taxes? >> right now you just borrow it, because the fa october of the matter -- when you're facing -- when you have a really good investment opportunity, if somebody's willing to lend you money cheap, you should take that. right now investing in boosting this economy is a really good investment opportunity and the u.s. government can borrow money really cheaply. markets are willing to lend 10-year bonds at under 1.9%.

the u.s. government can sell bonds that are protected against inflation. those have a negative interest rate. so money is available. the long run we're going to have to pay, regardless, the amount of money we spend right now makes almost no difference to the long run budget picture. we are going to need some spending cuts and additional taxes later. and we can talk about that. i think we need to do health care costs, we need to find some additional revenue sources. but that's not now. the markets are sort of saying, please, here's our money, take it use it for something useful and we can use it. >> here's a democratic caller. >> caller: it's an honor to speak to mr. krugman, i have been following him for years. i would like to know what he feels about the tax that was -- taxing everything that, with a

small tax that is dividends, you know, stocks, bonds, we used to have a sub transfer tax in new york city city that giuliani put out. a lot of these corporations have no taxation, they pay nothing when they buy and sell stocks and it's an enormous involve volume, cameron of the uk said that he would support the toep and tax idea, that it was universal that people who do business with those who buy stocks would move somewhere where there is no taxation for the benefit of their customers. >> the idea is to have a small tax on transactions that take place in foreign exchange markets, stock markets, whatever, very small, a fraction of a fraction of a cent. which would serve two purposes,

it would generate revenue and it would somewhat discourage hot money, people from doing high speed, jumping in and out of stuff which can be destabilizing. i don't think that hot money is the score of what went wrong with our economy. i think it was actually longer term bad decisions, it was bad mortgages, not bad -- three-month or even one-day investments. but still part of the issue. and the money could be useful so i'm all for it. yes, it does need to be, the two great financial centers in the world are in london and new york. and either one of those are reluctant to do it by itself because one would move to the other. we should be able to coordinate on this -- it's not panacea, it a useful things. >> austerity backlash sends euro back to the danger zone.

and it shows angela merkel looking a little bit frustrated, like what should we do now kind of look. what are the consequences for our -- maybe you can paint the big picture for the u.s. economy. >> a little perspective, there's two ways, there's two kinds of threats, one threat is massive financial collapse, a sort of superversion of the failure at leeman in 2008. that can be devastating everywhere. as the failure of leeman september the whole world into a slump. something like that in europe, we would have the same effect. i think that's not too likely because the european central bank and the federal reserve sort of saw what happened last time. they're standing there, they have essentially unlimited funds to throw at this because they control the money. so i think that's controllable.

and the rest, is not as bad as people think. the euro situation is awful. and we should be deeply concerned about that, but primarily because europe is our ally, europe is the other great democratic entity in the world, not the only one, but europe is is is -- if things go bad for europe, things go bad for us. how much stuff do we actually sell to europe? it's not trivial, but it's only about 2% of what we produce. so even if we take a pretty serious hit to our exports to europe, it's not going to be a huge blow to the u.s. economy. so i think -- i'm worried always about our economy, i think there are a number of things to worry about. but i'm mostly worried about a european break up for what it means for the future of the world, not for what it means for the u.s. economy next quarter. >> one of our other tweeters

writes in and asks, if we have austerity anywhere, do you see places where austerity has been successful. >> people want it to work and they want to believe it works so they keep on promoting poor success stories. the irish have been told they were success stories twice. it doesn't turn out to be true, they're not recovering, their economy is still a mess. people find some country out there, latvia is supposed to be a success story, and they are growing, but that's after having a great depression level slump and they're not back to where they were therefore be crisis. people go back in history and they look for supposed successes in austerity. countries that had their own currencies were able to deval. countries that had high interest rates, high market interest rates, not the kind of risk

premium we're seeing right now. at the moment, there are no success stories, not even by the way, saying we have to have austerity to satisfy the bond markets, that hasn't worked either. the irish have done all they were supposed to do and they still don't have- >> caller: i think the problem is right now we're not in true capitalism, we're in fake capitalism, instead of looking at the europeans we should look at the austrians. we don't have true capitalism. as far as your comment about the feds, the fed has no money, they print it. and the answer is that they keep taxing people or forcing them to have medicare to buy something they don't want. >> we'll leave it there and get a response from paul krugman. >> if this isn't true capitalism, fine, it's like the

people who always said don't look at what was going on in the soviet union because it wasn't true come in addition. we have had the same system we have had basically since world war ii, we have had a government that provides a safety net, we have some regulations, that system worked pretty well for a long, long time. it's not as if this is some untried experiment that we're just discovering doesn't work. we have had 60 plus years of this system. so if this isn't true capitalism, and if you want to imagine this is some -- austrians, let's just say that we have had a pretty strong test of different views. there's one view that said that all this -- that running government deficits even in a depression was going to send interest rates skyrocketing, hasn't happened. even the fed by trying to expand the printing money, call it that, was going to leado