well, i'm going to get to that. i mean, we can't have too big of a debate here. you got your question. [laughter] >> don't worry, though. i'm going to answer your question. so there's some places where it really is completely broken. and there, yes, a lot of it has to do with poverty and, you know, families that are in bad shape and there are all kinds of reasons. and yet even there there are schools that work. so the question is, why is it that some schools are working and some schools aren't, even in the worst circumstances, and why don't we duplicate what works in those schools so that all kids have a chance? now, in other places, green bay and appleton and many communities through the wisconsin and michigan, the

average public school is actually doing a reasonably good job. but can i still say even if you factor out the urban schools, we are falling behind when it comes to math. our kids are falling behind when it comes to science. we have kind of settled into immediate okity when we compare ourselves -- mediocrity when we compare ourselves to other advanced countries and wealthy countries. that's a problem. because the reason that america over the last 100 years has consistently been the wealthiest nation is because we've also been the most educated nation. it used to be by a pretty sizeable factor we had the highest high school graduation rates, we had the highest college graduation rates, we had the highest number of ph.d.'s, the highest number of engineers and scientists.

we used to be head and shoulders above other countries when it came to aren't anymore. we're sort of in the middle of the pack now among wealthy advanced industrialized countries. so even with the good schools, we've got to pick up the pace. because the world's gotten competitive. the chinese, the indians, they're coming at us and they're coming at us hard and they're hungry. and they're really buckling down. and they watch -- their kids watch a lot less tv than our kids do, play a lot fewer video games. they're in the classroom a lot longer. [cheers and applause] >> so here's the bottom line. we've got to improve. we've got to step up our game. which brings me to the next point in your question, which is how do we do that. i agree with you that if all

we're doing is spreading around a lot of standardized tests and teaching to the test, that's not improving our education system. [cheers and applause] >> and so there's a saying in illinois i learned when i was down in a lot of rural communities. they said, "just weighing a pig doesn't fatten it." you can weigh it all the time, but it's not making the hog fatter. so the point being if all doing is testing and then teaching to the test, that doesn't assure that we're actually improving educational outcomes. we do need to have accountability, however. we do need to measure progress with our kids. maybe it's just one standardized test plus portfolios of work that kids are doing plus observing in the classroom.

there can be a whole range of assessments but we do have to have some accountability number one. number two, we do have to upgrade the professional development for our teachers. i mean, we still have a lot of teachers who are -- [applause] >> -- we've got a lot of teachers who are well-meaning but they're teaching science and they didn't major in science and they don't necessarily know science that well. and they certainly don't know how to make science interesting. so we've got to give them the chance to train and become better teachers. we've got to recruit more teachers, train them better, retain them better, match them up with master teachers who are doing excellent work so that they are upgrading their skills. if after all that training the teacher's still not very good, we've got to ask that teacher probably there are a lot of other professions out there. you should try one. [applause] >> i mean, i'm just being blunt.

[applause] >> but we're going to have to pick up the pace. now, the key point i want to make is this: we should focus on what works based on good data. and arnie duncan my secretary of education, this guy is just obsessed with improving our education system. he is focused 100% on it. and he is completely committed to teachers. we think that teachers are the most important ingredient in good schools. we're going to do whatever works to help teachers do a better job. [applause] >> we're going to eliminate those things that don't help teachers do a good job. [applause] >> some of its going to require more money. so in our recovery act we had more money for improving curriculums, teacher training, recruitment, a lot of these things. but you can't just put more money without reform. so some of its demanding more accountability and more reform.

there's one other ingredient, though, and that is parents. we've got to have parents. [cheers and applause] >> -- putting more emphasis on education with our kids. that's how we're all going to be able to pick up our game. [applause] >> so, all right. i've got time for one more question. and i'm going to go with this young lady right here who's got a picture of me, i guess. [laughter] >> very strong supporters of you. we followed you at the campaign rally back in september. i took my 5-month-old son. his name is daniel clay stevens and he's enrolled in illinois nation of indians of wisconsin. [cheers] >> there you go. >> you got to hold him. you actually called him adorable. i don't know if you remember. >> i'm sure he was. i do. >> i was just wondering if you'd be able to sign this for me. >> i can sign, that yeah. i'll ask -- i'll get one more question. i'll be happy to sign it. >> thank you. >> the young lady there. everybody is pointing at this young lady. so she must be really important.

or very popular. >> well, my name is jean marsh. i am the president of the green bay school board and i'm also a registered nurse and i work at saint ven sent hospital. [cheers and applause] -- saint vincent hospital. >> [applause] >> my question centers on wellness and personal responsibility for one's healthcare. could you talk about how your reforms would incorporate wellness and encouraging people to take more responsibility for their own healthcare? [cheers and applause] >> well, i think it's a great question. for those of you who are -- still have employer-based care, one of things that we've been doing is meeting with companies who are really doing some innovative things to encourage their employees to get well. and some of it involves financial incentives. so these employers, they'll say, you know, what we provide for your health insurance.

but if you quit smoking you will see money in your pocket in the form of lower premiums. if you lose weight, you will see an incentive, money in your pocket. then they set up gyms or, you know, arrange for club memberships for their employees. then what they do is they set up a computerized system so you can check your progress on an ongoing basis. just by logging on through the company. so there are a whole range of steps that a lot of employers are taking to help encourage. that and what we want to do is to work with those employers to give every company an incentive to do the right thing with their employees. now, for those who don't have an employer-based system or they're going through medicare or

medicaid or what have you, anytime that we can reimburse for preventative care, getting a regular mammogram or a pap smear or, you know, just having a regular checkup for, you know, colon cancer, to the extent that we are encouraging reimbursements on those items, then hopefully people will utilize them more. but i think that this is extraordinarily important. we can all take steps to become healthier. and there's nothing wrong with us giving a little bit of a -- a nudge in moving people in the direction of healthier lifestyles. but look. it's hard. and changing habits are hard.

and it starts with our children, which is why as a part of our overall healthcare reform, we've also got to talk about, for example, our school lunch programs. [applause] >> and you're at the head of a school board as well as a nurse, i know you're struggling with this. the cheapest way to feed all the kids is to have, you know, the frozen tater tots. and you get them out and you heat them up. and then you got pizza and fries. and then the soda companies, they all say, we'll put in a free soda machine in there so kids can have as much soda as they want. and pretty soon our kids are seeing their rates of type two diabetes skyrocket! they're not getting the exercise because a lot of schools are running out of money when it comes to p. e.

kids are sitting in front of the tv all day long. michelle and i always used to talk, when we were kids, folks our age and over will remember this, basically your folks -- especially during the summer -- you would leave at 8:00 and then maybe you came home for some lunch. and then you'd be gone until dark. and youth come back in. and that whole time you were out there running around. well, kids aren't doing that. now, some of its safety issues. and that's why public safety is important. having playgrounds is important. having adults who are willing to volunteer for little league and basketball leagues, that's all important. but we've got to get our children into healthier habits. that in turn will lead to healthier adults. and so government can't do all of this. i'm the first one to acknowledge

this. that's why i'm always puzzled when people, they go out there creating this boogie man about how obama wants government run everything -- i don't want government to run stuff. like i said, i've got enough stuff to do. [laughter] >> i've got north korea and i've got iran. i've got afghanistan and iraq. [applause] [cheers] >> i don't know where people get this idea that i want to run stuff or i want government to run stuff. i think it would be great if the healthcare system was working perfectly. and we didn't have to be involved at all. that would be wonderful. that's not how it's working. we've got a 50-year experiment in that. it's not worked well. so i actually think that if everybody has a pragmatic attitude about this problem, they say, we're all going to have to do our part. families are going to have to do

their part by being healthier, employers do their parts by encouraging their employers to be healthier, government doing its part by making sure that those people who are working very hard but still don't have health insurance or their premiums are getting too sky high that getting a hand up, insurance companies, drug companies doing their part by not price gouging or trying to cut people out of the system, if hospitals adopting best practices, if we're doing all those pieces then we can start bending this cost curve down. and that's one last point i want to make. because what you'll hear during this debate over the next several weeks is people will also say the deficit and the debt are skyrocketing. and that's the reason why we can't afford to do health reform. so i just want to repeat: the single biggest problem we have

in terms of the debt and the deficit is healthcare. it's medicare and medicaid. [applause] >> that is -- when you hear all these projections about all these trillions of dollars and red ink going, you know, out as far as the eye can see, almost all of that is because of the increase in medicare and medicaid costs that are going up much much faster than inflation. it's undoubtedly true that this economic crisis has hurt our budget situation. because again, a lot less money is coming in from corporate taxes, sales taxes, et cetera. so that reduces the amount of money coming in at the same time as we're having to put a lot more money out for food stamps and for unemployment insurance and all kind of other help that people need when they get thrown out of their jobs, subsidizing

cobra so they can keep their healthcare. that's contributed some of it. the some of its that i have proposed some investments in education and in energy and in health information technologies. but there was just an article in the "new york times" yesterday that showed that all that stuff, everything that i've proposed -- my stimulus package, what we've done in terms of bailing out the financial system, all that stuff -- that accounts for maybe 7, 8% of what you've seen in terms of increased debt and deficit. the real problem is medicaid and med ca carry. that's the nightmare scenario. if we can bend the curve, the cost curve down so that healthcare inflation is no more than ordinary inflation, it's matching up with the amount of increases that you're seeing on your paychecks in your wages and your incomes, then wee going to

be ok. and if we don't get a handle on it we're not going to be ok. it doesn't matter that we eliminate earmarks or do all that other stuff. that won't make any difference. we'll still be consumed by a huge debt for the next generation. that's why it's so important. that's why we're going to get it done. that's why i need your help, green bay. thank you, everybody. god bless you. [cheers and applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> the government funding of direct aid to colleges and their students really is a late 1950's, early 1960s thing that has grown very rapidly since then.

>> hillsdale college has never accepted government funding. and today not even government-backed student loans are permitted. >> you know, title iv of the higher education act is 400 roughly pages long. we have a lawyer here in town who tries to keep the government from giving us money. and i went to ask him to send me title iv. and he said it wasn't any use, i wouldn't be able to read it. >> hills dale college president larry arnn sunday night at 8:00 on c span q and a or listen on xm satellite raid yes or podcast. >> how's c span fundd? >> private donations? >> taxes? >> i don't really know. >> from public television? >> donations. >> i don't know where the money comes from. >> federally? >> contributions from donors. >> how's c-span funded? 30 years ago, america's cable companies created c-span as a public service. a private business initiative. no government mandate.

no government money. >> house speaker nancy pelosi at her weekly briefing restated her support for including a government-run insurance option in healthcare legislation. she also comments on wednesday's shooting at the holocaust museum here in washington. this is about 15 minutes. >> good morning. yesterday we were all deeply shaken by the news of the violent attack at the holocaust museum. it reminds us of the valiant work of people who strive to protect us here, whether it's the tourist who visit, the press who cover, the members of congress. and the embassies, the administration. they do so with great courage. we had our own gibson and

chestnut, those two words mean a great deal to us here. two who lost their lives guarding the capitol. and now steven johns. later today we will have a resolution on the floor, hopefully to be a comfort to his family, and also to talk about how despicable this act of violence was. it's really sad. earlier this week we met with the president at the white house when he announced his pay as you go initiative. it was with great excitement that we heard his statement. just as a little history, maybe even ancient history to some of you, that means before you were born history, in 198 -- 1-9d 82 at the -- 1982 at the democratic

mid-term convention, there was a resolution proposed for pay as you go. it was passed. it became part of the democratic platform that year. and it took until 1990 for it to become operative here when president bush was president of the united states. throughout the 90's it was how we operated. pay as you go. and the last four budgets of president clinton were in balance or in surplus. we have to return. you know what has happened in the eight years interseening in terms of the reversal of that under president george w. bush. but now, happily, democrats are coming together around this concept. for many years it has been the central organizing purpose of the blue dog, fiscal discipline, fiscal responsibility. but i want you to know that their initiatives from all sectors of our caucuses which support pay as you go.

early this year in february i sent a year to our colleagues, the chairs of the committees, to ask them to subject everything under their scrutiny -- under their jurisdiction to the harshest scrutiny to find savings, whether it's waste fraud abuse, objects less ens or duplication. we have gotten a reports back he we'll save $10 billion below the president's budget in that and as an appropriations bills go forward, they will implement that direction. health care reform will be part of how we address reducing the deficit. healthcare reform is entitlement reform, as the president so clearly states. so it's with great excitement that we are accelerating our discussion of pay as you go as an important part in how we go forward on energy, on healthcare, on education, the three pillars, to turn the economy around.

the congress in the next week or so will have legislation on the supplemental and the f.d. a. but our committee work will be focused on the three pillars of the president's agenda, which were in the budget. healthcare again, education, energy. reduce the deficit, lower taxes, create jobs, turn the economy around. now i'll be pleased to take any questions. yes, sir. >> -- healthcare reform will be fully paid for? >> yes. that is our intention. and that is the work that we are doing now. what are the priorities, how is it scored, how do we pay for it. it will be paid for. >> ok. >> speaker pelosi? back here. >> oh. >> -- disclosure forms around you have -- [indiscernible] to other members of congress in the bail you the funds.

do you think -- not just bail you the funds but in large aspects of the economy your investment in cleaner ery, comcast. do you think there should be stronger restriction on how members of congress -- is it a conflict of interest and should there be stronger restrictions? >> no. i don't think there should be restriction on investment. when it became a company that was receiving funds, we divested ourselves of that. for a long time a.i.g. was a thriving company and a concern in our country. but when there's any thought of conflict of interest, yes, then we should divest. but we don't know what that's going to be in advance. who would have ever thought a.i.g., this giant of an industry, would come to the place where the united states government had to bail it out? yeah. nobody's happy about.

that yes. -- happy about that. >> madam speaker, later today congress will meet -- the conference committee on the supplemental budget. >> yes. >> there's been a lot of debate about [indiscernible] from the senate. has a final decision been made on that? if the decision has been made to strike that then the house bill -- pass it through the house, how was that decision arrived at and why? >> no final decision has been made. the conference committee will work its will and make its decision. but i can say to you there's great concern in the house about making an exception to a freedom of information act while the case is before a judge. >> madam speaker, when your office was working on the [indiscernible] legislation and other bail you the legislation, did you at the time know about your portfolio and how much money your family had invested in the a.i.g. and other companies? is. >> well, i signed my disclosure

form, yes. we didn't know on september 17th or 18th the administration would come in and tell us the condition of our economy, that if we didn't act now we would not have an economy. that was a thursday night. by monday, no, we did not know that. but i sign my disclosure forms. >> madam speaker, on energy chairman waxman and congressman boucher said they're working toward a floor debate before the july 4th recess. can you confirm that is the goal that you're working toward? and also how are you helping to bridge the differences with the ag ag committee? >> we will bring the bill to the floor when they are red yes, -- when they are ready. and i congratulate chairman waxman and mr. markey for the masterful job they did in passing the bill through the energy and commerce committee. other committees have their jurisdiction to weigh in on, and that's the process we're involved in. and when we're finished and when

ready we'll go to the floor. >> madam speaker, there are bipartisan discussions in the senate about an i.b.m. creating privately run cooperatives instead of public option,. just wondering what you think of the concept. and given the concern about some of your moderate members about public options is this something you might be open to? >> not instead of a public option, no. in our caucus i think members have been -- i know that members have been very clear about what their concerns might be about a public option. and i agree. it should be actuarily sound. it should be administrative self-sufficient. it should be a real competitor with the private sector and not have an unfair advantage. when you say the words "public option" if that is the term that we right next to it "level playing field." but in our house there's strong support for a public option and great respect for the concerns that had been raised within our

caucus. and we will address them. >> madam speaker, given you're just described can be very complicated for people to understand. given the experience the clinton healthcare plan and what we had with medicare part b with public worries and anxiety and confusion, what strategy are you going to follow to explain this massive bill to people? because healthcare is people's -- one of their most basic worries in life. >> it sure is. it's a personal worry in terms of their health and well-being. it's also an economic issue for them as well. and i always say everybody in the country is an expert on his or her healthcare and how to be able to afford it. we have our overarching message of affordability, accessibility and quality that the president has put forth. and that framework we will have the initiatives to help us meet those goals and a deeply rooted in those values.

right now the bill's being considered, and i can only speak to the house. the three committees are working in unison practically with an unified staff. they will have a -- something on the table in a week or two. hopefully most of it will already be scored. because at some point we have to know how much each element of it costs to see what we can afford and then how we pay for it. it will be paid for. and that challenge for us is to relate what we are doing here to the lives of the american people and how this makes a difference to them. but very excited about it, whether it's about prevention and wellness which is the important part of this, investments in scientific research so we can have personalized, customized care for all americans with investments in technology so that we have a common record for all the people to be on it, whether it's