iranian issue as it relates to their nuclear program. there are a number of things that are ongoing, and i think the president -- is safe to say the president is heartened by the turnout in 11 non and -- in in lebanon and demonstrates a win for democracy. . .

>> this takes some ground work to be laid in order to be able to move that money from individual to -- individual departments. it took some time to get the legislation passed. we do not feel in any way that the recovery is bogged down or the efforts. you heard jared say that by his estimations we are slightly ahead of where we ought to be. most of the spending has been obligated. beginning april 1st, 95% of working americans saw an increase in their paycheck. they will see that in a steady level over the course of two years. this is a sustained effort over the course of two years to jump- start the economy to make critical investments in many of the projects that injured

pointed out. this is to create -- that jared pointed out. we went to the foundation for long-term economic growth. >> in the president's session today, he says, knock on wood, there have not been the scandals. >> i think that, in many ways, you want to lay the foundation for how this money is going to move out, ensure that you have steps in place, protocols in place to deal with an evaluation of contracts in moving the money to the places that need it. i think the notion that the first day of the bill passage we were going to move $787 billion was not ever the case. you ask me about the spin out rate as part of the lead up to the debate. -- spend out rate as part of the lead up to the debate. >> is there a sense of the

effort to make sure there is not fraud, waste, scandals? is there a sense of that slowing down? >> no, i do not think so. i do not think we see it slowing down. think it is important, as the president underscored this back in december with meetings with the economic team, it is important to ensure that in the saw that allowed the debate of the bill in the early implementation. the president was very concerned and rightly concerned that we do this in a way that gives the american people confidence about the way this money is being spent. it is crucially important -- like i said, the steps and particles that are necessary for this to happen in order to make sure this is done as quickly as possible and without the waste and abuse that sometime can be associated. >> 150,000 jobs, is that a

projection? there is no hard evidence yet of this number. >> again, i would point back to his answer of his reports. >> we do not have the fax we need. -- facts we need. >> 8 to paraphrase what he said, but if you need money for the example i was using or some economic stimulus, you are going to buy supplies from someone else who is going to create. >> you do not know of this is going to create one job or two jobs. it is a projection. >> based on an economic formula of how to do that. >> why is this not trickle-down economics when you talk about that? >> breeze suggesting that the

multiplying effect of creating jobs is a part of trickle-down economics? -- are you suggesting that the multiplying effect of creating jobs is a portrait of that economics? >> in the example of these windows, absolutely. you do not make windowpanes out of papier-mache, right? you have to buy aluminum, glass. does the production of aluminum and glass and the purchase of making windows in order to increase production so that the tax credit can be fully taken advantage of? are we to producers doing that? yes. are the sale of aluminum and glass for these would is creating jobs? as the readers of bloomberg when they make investments in resources again, there are multipliers and formulas. in order to make determinations as to what that number is, look

at those formulas. >> every quarter are we going to get a hard number? >> i think that is what he talked about with to the reports. -- with the reports. you cannot build a windmill out of nothing. you cannot build a turbine out of nothing. the purchase of resources to build the wind turbines to the wind company can take care of the -- the division the tax credit is based on the resources needed to build these. i will concede that the wind is free and some of it is blowing hot in my direction. [laughter] >> there are a lot of numbers being thrown around. you guys are claiming credit for summer jobs that will not be there in three years.

>> know. -- no. you should ask as many questions as you want but if the jury gives you a question about -- but if jared is you a question about how one job = two jobs. he gave you the formula for part-time and full-time jobs. >> excuse me. would you then concede that that job will not be there in three years? >> will i concede that the summer drought will not be there in the fall? yes, i would concede. i think jared answered your question. send in the transcript. -- send him the transcript. >> if korea its have to do this, is that a red line? >> i am not part of the attempt

for that. >> i have heard some whispers that the president's speech on thursday could help things breed is that the way you guys see things? >> i will say that the president was pretty clear in cairo about the importance of elections. i think people can be hard hinted that. the turnout far exceeded the last election. -- i think people can be heartened by that. there is a shared commitment to democracy and a sovereign and independent lebanon predicting that is certainly important. i think you look up the effects it to the actual alexian taking place, most people believe that the march 14th coalition was not going to be successful. i would say that they do not think the president was one of those people. i think, just as the president

talked about this in cairo, the lebanese people are more interested in a government that builds things up rather than one whose main job is to tear things down. >> what about iran's elections this week? could there be some influence there? >> it is hard -- let me also say this. as i said, the president talks about the importance of elections. the importance cannot be measured by the fact is simply you can have an election. the importance is not simply about the fact that you have an election. the importance is the actions of which the government takes. let's not get ahead of where we are. >> they had a fair election. >> as i believe, the government said they were going to do

dohamas was elected --to do if hamas was elected. i think pretty clearly -- again, i'm finding myself in the uncomfortable position of being the bush administration's spokesperson for if you look at what was going to happen to u.s. aid were hamas to win in those elections -- again, helena, before i can even answer these i think you need to look at exactly what was said prior to the election and what was implemented as a jet -- as a direct relationship to that election. >> the vice president went to 11 on. >> i cannot say the people around the world do not listen to the news.

>> the biggest thing to come out of the g-20 was the international monetary fund. the u.s. portion of that is now hung up in congress because republicans are calling it a global bailout and will not votes on a bill that has that im itf money on it. what does the white house wanted you to unstick this -- want to do to unstick this? the would have this separate from the worsening to see if you get it to pass that way? -- do you want to have this separate from the more spending to see if you can get this to pass that way? >> that money and funding will be there for afghanistan and the critical needs of what is happening in pakistan as well as the commitments that were made

internationally relating to the imf. i think this is a process that is ongoing and we're going to work with congress to ensure we're going to get those priorities past. >> 3 confident that when the president goes to the conference in four weeks that he's going to have the money with them. -- are you confident that when the president goes to conference you have the money? >> is stepping up his efforts to get this done by august? -- is he steeping -- stepping up his efforts? >> his big going to be spending the next few months working on his priorities. -- he is going to be spending the next few months working on his priorities. >> is that the subjects of the town meeting on thursday? >> yes.

>> two more questions. >> it two? [laughter] -- >> two? >> so we are in the second phase of the stimulus now. how many more phases do we have and will the very continue to increase or decrease? >> and will see burn rate continues to increase or decrease? >> about 7% of the money was the final figure will be spent through that two fiscal period. -- that two year fiscal period. >> i will get back to my other question. >> what is the government need a compensation [unintelligible]

? >> i'm not going to get into personnel announcements. >> it is something like that, yes. >> you mentioned to save jobs relating to states with a budget crisis according to estimates put together by the state budget officers, for the next two years states are already balking to and $30 billion in projected deficits. the estimate is about $100 billion with a gap. how concerned is the ministration -- is the administration with what is on the books and the jobs you might not be able to save? >> may be the most important policy response we can have is the one we're in the midst of implementing now and that is to get the economy moving again.

obviously, tax receipts for states are going to be determined by the health and well-being of the economy that we have today. the president is working to ensure that we get it moving as quickly as we can. hopefully we can put a different trajectory and some of those numbers. >> not a second or third response depending on a stimulus? >> well, some people consider him the first one would be the bush stimulus, the obama one would be the second. >> i knew i was out last week, but i had no idea. at this point, our focus far and away is insuring that the implementation of this legislation is done in both the timing -- timely fashion but also one that ensures that it is done in a way that is not

wasteful. >> speaking of what your are -- while you were away, at least five times a judge sotomayor used a variation the statement that her statements were a poor choice of words when she was talking about eight latino and coming to a better understanding treated this report choice of words show a pattern to the critics? >> as we have said here many times, the overall theme of her comments were that her experiences matter just as they did and just as they have for in the courts of justice sandra day o'connor and the others.

i think judge sotomayor has said in her visits to the speech you are referring to was a poor choice of words. >> i am wondering if it was a poor choice of words, if she said it when it might have been in error. it was as multiple times, i am not sure -- >> i think the overall scene is the experiences and backgrounds matter parade will talk about in 2001 was a poor choice of words. again, she said as much. >> it is not specific meeting, utterances, words. -- it is about a specific meaning, utterances, words. there appears to be a pattern of inconsistencies. >> what your unnamed critics do not seem to subscribe to any pattern that is in the hundreds

of opinions that she has written. >> pattern over words? >> if you want to know how judge is going to rule, i am under the impression is how they have world is a good indication -- how they have ruled is a good indication. the impartiality of how she looks at these issues has been pointed out by much news reporting over the past few days. i think we would expect, friend and foe alike, to judge her on her full body of work. >> how much of this back-and- forth of judges sotomayor is the words is a question of affirmative action cloaked in something else? >> i think it would not be a

good thing for me to infer what or why certain people who are seemingly opposed to her nomination characterizing it in different ways. i think it is important that we watch the use of what we say, but other than that i cannot and will not begin to appear in to their motivations. >> the president said today that he would suggest people do not think the economy stimulus is working to talk to the companies. is the white house keeping a list of the company's somewhere? are you guys going to pass that on recovery.gov? >> i do not know of those agreed to be posted or not. >> in other words, do we know how many such companies there are? >> again, i have read in a number of publications, some of whom occupy seats in this room,

that people have hired -- that businesses have hired people back. i do not have the list with me. i assume there are people who are writing down what they see in the newspaper. as we said, the reports directed the impact of this. if you read a fair number of articles, as i am sure most of you do, they understand and see clean energy companies talking about their increased investment. i think you see the article over the weekend about tax incentives on clean energy buses that have allowed companies to keep the employees to meet demand. >> just a matter of housekeeping. can you talk to us about the week ahead?

particularly tomorrow? >> i would never get a week ahead. we did not do it before i came out here today. >> on the green bay visit, his talk about people who need health care and he seems not to make an economic case about some hospitals deliver health care more efficiently. >> i do not think that will be the specific emphasis, but the president has always talked about health care as a very concrete matter of economics. the cost of health care matters into is -- matters to small businesses and families. to get back to the recovery act, the delivery of health care any more economic and official -- economic and effective way is something that the president, i think, will let these touch

upon. whether or not that is going to be the focus, i am not sure. when we're talking about health care at large, there is not one thing or only one thing that you can focus on. obviously, there are incredible proliferation of costs as i have said for families and small businesses, but also how are we going to change the way and make the delivery of health care more efficient so that a country that spends more per capita on health care does not find its way -- does the fund itself lagging in other ways. i think the advisory committees but it has not gone now, is in the processed. -- i think the advisory, if it has not gone out, is in the process. >> where you're aware of the other times judge sotomayor made similar utterances than other than the berkeley speech?

>> a lot of this blend together, so i do not entirely recall all that i have been briefed on. >> they are focusing on one speech, but i was wondering if you are aware that she said more than once. >> i am not aware of. >> and now that you are aware, as you think they are a poor choice in the words? >> i answered that a few minutes ago. >> you think they were all -- she regrets saying them in that way? >> i think i have said, i think the president has said, i think she has said that this was a poor choice in the words. >> i wanted to get a response to republicans who say that with the 11 trillion dollar -- with the $11 trillion that we should start to take some of the stimulus money but the momentum.

entries another reason why they did this events today. t think with a too optimistic projection and the disputes about these -- > >> i'm going to take these one at a time. >> i am not done. >> the notion that a report was prepared based on the best available economic data that was had and that a severe downturn in the fourth quarter growth and job loss that was far greater than anybody had expected both in december and january, i do not find it surprising that the overall number is a difference that it was when we sat here in december. it certainly wasn't we will ask me and january and february about statistics. -- it certainly was not when you all asked me in january and

february. just as you will ask me if the economy has bottomed out, right? if you are asking me if in december you can make all the accurate projections in terms of what the numbers are going to look like in february without having the data from january, i would say that is pretty hard to do. >> your taking questions from us and keep from critics about the jobs that are being created. there was a new point about the president's numbers on the economy that are slipping. i think the disapproval rating on the economy has gone up 12 points since february of. do think there is a danger of a credibility deficit on the issue of economy? >> we're focused on the implementation of the recovery plan. we're not focused on the latest polling. the >> can you responded to the republicans who say we should take the stimulus money and not

spend it if the government is starting to show signs of progress? >> is that is what they're saying? they think we're showing signs of progress? >> they think recovery is happening and that we're coming out of the worst of things as the president said two weeks ago. >> i will do this. i will answer that tomorrow if you give me the answer to whether or not you think republicans have seen an improvement in the economy. thank you. new >> the u.s. house is about to double back in and just under five minutes at 6:30 p.m. eastern time. they were beat -- there will be three votes before heading to special order speeches. later on in the house, cash rebates to americans to trade in older cars for new or more efficient models. also, the state permit programs

including peacekeeping. meanwhile, house and senate issues are trying to agree on a bill allotting almost $100 billion for more spending this year. that could come up later this week. -- war spending this week. there is a center come right. that will be live on c-span 3 at 7:00 p.m. eastern. speakers include new gingrich and current gop leaders. the house should return in just a few minutes for a series of books with live coverage here on c-span. here's a portion of today's washington journal. -- "washington journal." with the project on government secrecy. we have just finished talking a little about the cia and their preservation of the intelligence and a secret from congress. you heard some of that

conversation. anything surprise you? guest: just that it is part of a larger issue. hal information disclosure is regulated for political advantage. the government decides what it wants to disclose. it is often not based on principle, but on what serves their interests. that is a problematic approach. host: i should point out that the president has asked james jones, the national security adviser, to review the recommendations on the release of classified documents. what will happen in that 90-day period? guest: the classification is not based in law but an executive order. presidents typically issue their

own version to define the classification system. president obama has said i want you to look at revising the bush administration's executive order to promote greater openness and transparency. over the next 90 days the national security council is supposed to lead a review of the classification system and consider recommendations for greater transparency. host: you have put together a recommendation that will be published in a duel review and policy -- and the yale and policy review. you write about several levels. what are those? guest: there are three former levels. confidential, secret, and top- secret been the highest. there are also other kinds of controls on