>> 79% of people believe it is morally wrong to visit the undertaker and the tax man in the same week. i do not like john grimes quote "do not tell me it can't be done. i just outlined the first four prince that ought to be the heart of the republican party. -- so was welfare reform and so was balancing the budget and so was electing ronald reagan and so was eliminating the soviet empire. >> [cheers and applause]

>> if you go to a country with a genuine free market opportunity and you're prepared to win the argument and the margaret thatcher phrase that first you win the argument and then you win the vote and you go to the average small business in this country. you want to reach out to africans, south koreans, chinese, latinos, you go to every small business in america and say, "hi, if we cut your social security and medicare tax by 50% and we cut your match to the employer, would you have more money? would that be better than giving the money to general motors? would you like more than having rahm oklahoma spend it? you -- rahm emanuel spend it? they're going to want to come to the second town hall meeting. about, they will want to go to the second town hall meeting. we need the courage to offer america would be like that

reported work, savings, investment, risk taking, and was prepared to take on corrupt politicians and their allies had on. that is the gap we need. [applause] some will say, how do you cut taxes when we have such a big deficit? big deficits on the left remain -- mean raise taxes. as our budget committee chairman who i believe is the next governor of ohio -- [applause] could report to you, stopping spending is a lot better way to balance the budget. reforming government is a better way to balance the budget. modernizing and replacing bureaucracies and failed programs is a better way to balance the budget. let me say this very directly. i am the only speaker of the

house since the 1920's to have offered four consecutive balanced budgets. we pay of $405 billion in federal debt, and i am comfortable yes we can balance the budget again if we have the majority and if we are in charge. [applause] tax increases can't balance the budget because they crush the economy, which reduces revenues, and they encourage liberals to spend more. if raising taxes worked, new york and california would have balanced budgets, but they don't. the interest groups spend the money as fast as they find it. our record for four years was to control all federal spending, including entitlements, at 2.9% a year for four years, the lowest rate increase since calvin coolidge.

don't tell me it can't be done. that means you have to look at how did he do it. we also doubled the size of the national budget impasse the first tax cut in 16 years to accelerate economic growth and increased revenue through prosperity. we reformed welfare. this was not a negative. 92% of the american people favored welfare refor by the time we won the argument, we were in a position where two out of every three people went to work or school on welfare, got off medicaid, started paying taxes, their incomes went up, their lives got better. that was real change. we reform medicare when it was scheduled to go broke. only twice since world war two has spending gone down, 1991 and

1995. i think it would be easy for domestic discretionary spending -- i think the country would be grateful to have less pork flowing out of politicians. [applause] today, there are a huge opportunities for controlling spending. the level of fraud and corruption is stagnant. when you read in new york times story that 97% of the people who retire from along island railroad are getting disability, you are reading about a society so corrupt that theft has become the norm. the costs the u.s. taxpayer in the last decade $250 million. for theft. our estimate -- the book will,

of the summer. our estimate is that the minimum level of fraud on medicare and medicaid is between 75 and $125 billion a year. in the south florida, they closed 17 transfusion facilities. five of the 17 were pizza parlors. nobody understands how bad these governments are, how incompetent they are, how flawed they are, and how many crooks there are who are living off your tax money and running up your debt one of providing you a penny i service. there are a lot of places to find the money for tax cuts and work back to a balanced budget. real growth is more than taxes. a come through real incurs before the private-sector combined with real reform of government bureaucracies. [applause]

beyond tax policy, we need an american energy policy. we need a policy that emphasizes energy and america and recognizes. in north dakota, the estimate has gone up by 25 fold, 2500%, the amount of oil available. natural gas has produced a 100 years' supply of national-. we have three times the reserves of saudi arabia. brazil proved that you can go offshore, and they have gone from 10 billion barrels reserve to 90 billion barrels of reserves in the atlantic. kohl on the planet -- we have the largest supply of coal in the planet.

that is an enormous potential asset. we have by officials and ethanol, new breakthroughs in hydrogen, wind, and solar. america today is artificially weakened by bad government policies, which favor imports over american energy. dowling to the saudi king is not an energy policy. [applause] for national security, for the national economy, we should keep the money here. the next grade building boom ought to be in denver, not to buy. the american people agree. we launched a petition drive of drill here, drawn-out, payless. it 79 percent of the american people agree that both for economic reasons and national

security, we should develop american energy, and that it is a key to our future. the american people reject an american energy tax. this is an energy tax. every american at every level will pay it, and it will export jobs to china. [applause] the american people reject an environmental protection agency which is exaggerating its power. we should replace the current bureaucratic system at epa with an entrepreneurial system that is fundamentally different. americans reject the liberal principle of paying more to get less. i began reading the waxman bill, and i gave up when i got to the page where they were explaining how they would regulate jacuzzi 's. people believe that 31-year olds

can redesign the automobile industry and the bureaucrats in washington need to go down to the level to make sure you only get the right jacuzzi are people that have lost any sense of what made america a unique, and the sense of personal freedom, and the correct answer is to defeat them and let them write a book for the rest of their life. [applause] i wrote a book which is an outline of a growing conservatism. i used to teach environmental studies. i believe americans want a creative, entrepreneurial, and effective policy for ample energy the money staying in america. finally, i think if we want to compete with china and india, we have to confront the challenge of education. it in 1983, i participated when

the rating commission said our schools are so bad that if a foreign power is doing what to their children it would be considered an act of war. nothing much has changed. the pores kids in america are trapped in schools that are bad. they are more likely to go to jail that college. their lives are limited by the failure to learn. in 2001, i participated in a report that president clinton and i created. we looked out to 2025 and national security. the greatest threat in march before 9/11 was a weapon of mass destruction going off in an american city probably from terrorists. the second greatest threat to the united states is the failure in science and math education. it is a greater threat than any conceivable conventional war. not much has been done despite all of the bureaucracy and spending. we still have an immense

distance to go. rev. al sharpton actually has its correct. i think he is on to a very big idea, that education has to become the first civil right of the 21st century. it now is the time to be bold. if we believe we are endowed by our creator, with certain unalienable rights, the party that wraps around the declaration of independence and stays firm for being americans, every child deserves to learn. every adult that has been lost by bad education deserves to learn. every first time prisoner deserves to learn. education is a moral, as well as an economic, and national security issue. i would go much further than the president. i favor vouchers. i'd love to have debates over

wipeout grants are for -- are good for after 12 grade. there is is on that we can find common ground with president obama. he favors on limited charter schools. if we work actively and aggressively and campaign to pass laws at the state level and pass federal laws, the reward of those states that adopted on limited charter schools and allowed every parent to have a choice of any school with having -- without having the school's track by unions or by the bureaucracy, we would in a matter of a year or two have finally begun to change the system. the education establishment today is trying to kill charter schools all across america. it is an immoral and destructive program. it places the defense of the incumbent ahead of the lives of the children. we need eight save the children

campaign and a save the uneducated adults campaign. we must have a faith-based prison system which has said the lives of thousands of people. we owe it to the 2 million americans currently in prison to recognize that they are endowed by their creator with rights and we have a deep moral obligation to them. i believe we have a deep moral obligation to say the unborn, but i also believe we have a deep moral obligation to care for children after they have been born and to help every american in every community have a better future. we should go boldly into every community and reach out to every american. i think it is vital that we do that. this administration would destroy the american health-care system. the new york times let the cat out of the bag with its cheerful

call for a maximum tax increase. i think the director of the budget should have frightened all of us. i am fundamentally opposed to comparative effectiveness becoming the first step toward rationing, because if we have been endowed by our creator, how can a government bureaucrat tell you you don't deserve the best possible madison, the best possible procedure, the best possible hospital? i think the court fight of the next few months will be what we have worked for years on. can we in fact develop a health system which is a health-based health reform working on the standards and best procedures, modernizing the system, saving enormous amounts of money, which would allow us to change the system? can we do it without going to a british-style national health- care system, going to this

system that blocks americans from getting best practices, and turn power over to a washington bureaucrat to decide whether or not we live? i think it is essential question to the future of our country. the republican party has as great a moral challenge when lincoln was campaigning for illinois. it has the greatest challenge than it had in 1976 when ronald reagan having lost the nomination was invited by president ford to come down and said we may be fewer than we have been, but we have the moral obligation to reach out to every american, to recruit every person, to make our case for america's future. we stand for a strong national homeland security system. we stand for a solid base. we can offer far better solutions than the left.

it i am very proud to be a republican activist. i am committed to american principles. i am committed to freedom for the individual, committed to defending america. what is at stake? the future of this extraordinary experiment in individual human freedom. i hope each of you will leave here tonight, dedicated for your children, for your grandchildren, to reach out to every person that you can touch to making the decision that we will win in 2010, and in 2012, and in the great tradition of jimmy carter, make this one-term left-wing presidency. let me remind you of a great coach. "do not tell me it can't be done to coat it was true for fdr. it is true for us. thank you and god bless you.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> this is the end. there is going to >> this is the end. there's going to a party next door with a band and a wonderful celebration that's going to go on. obviously there are great men in the republican party. newt gingrich is one of them. and this was a great speech. [applause] >> as for my contribution, personally i'll get as many hollywood friends to join me in putting the republicans back in the white house and i will continue to fight to protect our constitution with newt and i will never be silent.

no one can threaten me in any way to stop speaking and believing what i know to be the truth. [cheers and applause] >> there are quite a lot of people in show business who believe what i believe. we have to be leaders to give them the strength strength to speak up for the truths. may god lead us on the right path back into the white house and may god bless america. thank you very much, everybody. [cheers and applause] >> there's still time to get your copy of c span's 2009 congressional directory with information on house and senate members, the cabinet, supreme court justices and the nation's governors plus district maps and how to contact commitees and

caucuses. it's 16.95. online at c span.org/products or call 1-877-on-c span. >> josh voorheis of environment and energy daily joining us on the telephone. tell us about this bill that lawmakers casually referred to as the cash for chunkers legislation. how would it work? >> basically it would offer americans about $4.5 thousand to trade in an older gas guzzling vehicle for a newer one. there's a little discrepency on exactly where the standard ard and threshold is for the trade in and the new vehicle. the house proposal which came out of the energy and commerce committee was introduced by representative betty sutton, the threshold for older vehicles would be about 18 miles per gallon. in order to qualify for the credit it would need be a i think it is a four-mile per hour

increase for cars and one mile per hour increase for trucks. >> now you mentioned the house. they're set to consider a bill on tuesday. will it get the two-thirds needed for passage? >> it appears headed that way. it's got pretty wide bipartisan support. when it came out of e.n.c. i think it passed 50-4. the only concern is there's been some discussions that the house leadership may attempt to insert it into the support for the war supplemental which could cloud things a little bit. there's opposition to that from the for some conservative republicans but that isn't necessarily related to the chunkers bill as much as some other provisions. >> over in the senate, michigan democratic senator debbie stabinau, there are reports she's working to get this cash for chunkers language added to the tobacco regulation bill the senate is working on. why would she do that? >> she's pretty good at getting this moving as are most michigan

democrats. there was a little hurdle last week there. were objections raced from the appropriations committee mostly because the money to fund this which would authorize about $4 billion would be coming from unspent stimulus dollars so. there's a technical hurdle they have to create with the appropriations committee. there's talk that she's going to work around that or possibly introduce this as a standalone bill later this week. the big issue is there's a handful of senators who are backing a separate proposal which would basically strengthen the proofments. they argue that this cash for chunkers bill which as you tensible is both for the the environment and the industry, this group led by susan collins and diane feinstein, basically it's another hand you the to the industry that these fuel economy increases are so small that they don't even make up for the carbon emissions coming from the production of all these new vehicles. >> how active has president obama been in pushing congress to pass this legislation now? >> he's publicly come out in

support of it several times. normally whenever he's had a press conference announcing the latest for g.m. and chrysler he's urged lawmakers to act. he hasn't necessarily weighed in publicly on which of the two proposals, either the one backed by the michigan democrats in the industry or some of the environmentalists which one he supports. but the house version came out of a compromise in the energy and commerce committee. and it was announced the same day after they met at the white house with president obama. so in theory he's played a pretty big part in that compromise. >> what will you be watching most closely now as this legislation winds its way through the process this week and beyond? >> it seems as though it's got the support to pass. my eyes will be on what bill will they do it with. like i said before if it becomes part of the war supplemental there's a whole lot of mess it would create with how it will move. if there's stand alone versions in the house and certainly the cincinnati seems as though it would be clear sailing with the small exception of the group

with feinstein and collins that may attempt to negotiate. i know they met with senator state on several times and are hoping to come to some type of compromise as their house colleagues did. but it would seem that stabinau's version is going to move. >> josh voorheis of environment and energy daily. thanks for being with us. >> thanks so much. >> you're watching public affairs programming on c span. up next, former baltimore sun reporter and creator of h.b.o.'s "the wire" talks about the future of journalism. later remarks from national intelligence director dennis blare.

>> now journalist and author david simon, a former baltimore sun reporter, talk, about the challenges facing journalism in the age of media consolidation and declining newspaper circulation. mr. simon is also known for his work writing and producing tv draw mass such as h.b.o.'s "the wire" and "generation kill" and nbc's "homicide life on the streets." from the national press club, this is about 55 minutes.

>> good afternoon. welcome. my name is mark hamerik of ap broadcast. i'm a membership secretary at the national press club. we are the world's leading professional organization for journalists and we are committed to the future of journalism by providing journalism programming and education and fostering free press around the globe. for more information please visit the web site at www.nationalpress.org. i'd like to welcome our speaker and those in the audience today and those who are watching live on c-span. we also provide our broadcasts over itunes for podcasting. we look forward to today's speech. and afterwards we'll ask as many questions from the audience as time permits. i would ask kindly you please withhold your applause from the speech so that we have time for as many questions as possible. for our broadcast audience i would like to explain if you do hear applause it is from guests and members of the general public who attend our luncheons

not necessarily from always neutral working journalists. >> i would like to introduce sam husseini for the institute for public accuracy. andrew snyder, associate editor of kiplinger washington editors and chair of the n.p.c. book and author committee. cheryl arvertsen. jeffrey bartholette. marilyn g wax with national public radio. the other side of the podium, angela king chair of our speakers' committee. laurie rousseau, organizer of today's luncheon and the new managing director of stanton

communications. congratulations. valerie jackson associate editor with plats. ira allen public affairs specialist with the fogarty international center and the national institutes of health. skip keltenheiser, independent author and writers of letters from washington. rick dunham, washington bureau chief, one of our former presidents here with hearst newspapers and glad to have rick here as well. finally, r.e.m. writer editor and publisher with american journalism and review. and now you can give your applause. thank you. >> it may come as a surprise to some of you here today as you've watched our speakers luncheons over the years that we do not intend to site members of the press to speak at the podium. for one thing it would get way out of control if we start letting those doors open, right? but we have a special cause to do that today because our speaker is truly a special individual. but generally we think that

journalists cover the news and we try not to perhaps put them in a spotlight they might otherwise feel uncomfortable in. but as i said, today's guest is an exception. david simon, a long time journalist at the baltimore sun, honed his skills reporting on the streets of one of the the most dangerous cities of our country. and after years of reporting the realities of inner city life it, wasn't the murder, drugs or other horrific crimes that drove him out of the journallively industry. he left, he told the baltimore city paper in the year 2003, because, quoting here, "some sons of bitches bought my newspaper and it stopped being fun." [laughter] >> did we have that right? is that an accurate quotation? >> australia australia. >> ok. >> he took a leave of absence and for a full year shad dead the result was the edgar award-winning bookhood," a year on the killing streets" which