to guarantee these warranties for five years and get banned from my area? >> i am not aware of any f-15 trips that are necessary for service, because we did look at the average distance. we will also take a look that your area as to the distance difference would be. the jeep dealership that closed, repairs can now be made in the dodge chrysler dealership that exist within the same market area. the customers will have another service outlet available. >> mr. henderson, do want to -- >> we tried as much as possible to manage the drive times for service. we looked at state-by-state. we looked at averages. we looked at averages across the united states. if i look, for example, michigan is 19-23 minutes. . . vrolet will go from this is miles

comics to come ten to 14.5 models -- the issue is on the extremes because there will be situations we clearly have a problem. >> mr. chairman, if i might, closing the dealership is closing the dealership is probably at least 100 miles to chevy so the people are going to go from climate falls now to medford. burdens, closing burns, 136 miles to pay the new list dealership, right? >> we will have situations where we have problems and we are going to have to solve these problems. >> and how will use of the problems? putting a dealership back? >> that is not aware intent and one of the things we said in the case of -- first fall, another general motors franchisees can provide work. >> there isn't another one in climate falls, burns -- >> the second thing we cities in

the event we need to put in place, put a location back one of the things we committed to the senate and i welcome it is if we need to locate a spot we will provide system operators the opportunity to look up at first. >> what's go to bend, oregon. you close to bend, redmon and leave matchless. so, what is that process is going to be put in place that allows mr. thomas may be to get his dealership back. you're telling me you were going to look at it and decide. i wouldn't be asking if it wasn't taxpayer dollars funding this whole thing, i would like you figured out under the law of the land. i actually voted for t.a.r.p.. i didn't vote for the although bill but i voted for t.a.r.p.. what we will do as i said we will have location bilocation if we've made mistakes in the future we conclude we can't take

care of customers in the location and appointees to be put back we would go to whether the individual was affected and give the first chance to do that >> we may follow that further because i am just looking at chrysler and here is michigan you know the peninsula is very small. two big cities, dealers are gone. that's the two biggest cities in the upper peninsula and now the next one closest across the bridge is sheboygan, and the next one is rogers city, that's gone, and actually with the cadillac dealer there's no one in northern michigan. basically north of lansing or traverse city, which is part of my district there is not a cadillac dealer around there with some of these ideas. not that i drive a cadillacs, ayman oldsmobile bayh and could took that away, too. white is the distance as we have to travel. i will have to follow that up

because looking at the map and thinks that have been closed just doesn't make sense and there's district and miles between so they could say it could hurt you in rural areas where there's still loyal customer base i agree plus federal government's guarantee warranties. >> i just want to add one thing, mr. chairman, because of the concerns we've raised today, about one of the other critical aspects of these bankruptcies, that is the responsibility when forward for any products that may be defective and the implications for u.s. taxpayers and the dealers in this room i would strongly urge the committee to take up that issue as well and flush about in more detail. i think it has enormous economic consequences even for people lost their franchise and i would like to explore that in further

detail. >> i continue to hear from dealers and also to reiterate i know dr. burgess had to leave, but i know he entered into that discussion with both you and mr. prez and mr. henderson about e-mail traffic to i think it's in the white house that might i understood you to indicate you would supply that e-mail dak george's approach would be to follow up in the letter of request but eissenstat isn't a problem for you to provide those e-mails. ms. sutton? >> thank you come mr. chairman. i want to add of course as you can see who stayed here at the end as was pointed out the car act we passed this week represent braley, and our original cosponsor and chairman stupak and chairman dingell were involved in the process of getting that bill done and it is intended to have a concrete impact because we do believe

that mr. keikenapp said, we want for chrysler and gm to be a success because it is linked to our work communities and jobs and the food it puts on the tables of the people we are honored to represent and so it's painful for us to be here and in this position but the payment that we feel listening to this is nothing compared to what we have heard displayed here on the folks losing their dealerships and i want to thank all of you that came here today to put a human face and perspective about cost of what is going on on this major problem so thank you for coming and mr. chairman, thank you for holding this hearing. we do want you to be successful. >> thanks, and that concludes all the questions from the members. i keep the hearings have been helpful since the senate hearing

we have a process with general motors to help some of the steelers and there is gm and the auto dealers association working together to try to do some things i think that's positive and we have further explanations but we will continue to monitor this. there's the age 2743 sitting out there, g mack and others and it's been a long hearing and we appreciate everyone for coming and there is something anyone wants to out i will give you a minute if you want to add something. we really do appreciate especially the dealers and mr. henderson and mr. press and others coming some distance. i know that you've raised your hand and that because the rules of the ray hearing i couldn't recognize you so if there's something you want to add we will go right on the line and if anybody wants to add something that we will wrap this up. we are going to keep it somewhat brief. >> im just perplexed when mr. press last week said in the case of dealers not being taken forward last year they lost 55,000 units of sales, i -- the

number is important to them apparently. but then like i say, they are going to lose 140,000 units in sales when the steelers are removed. i know that he says they can only produce 700,000 cars but there has to be a plan in place for growth the market improves. i'm sure it can build another 140,000 cars. that's why i am perplexed on that so i thought i would throw that in. >> thank you for coming. mr. spitzer, anything? >> [inaudible] [inaudible]

>> mr. press? >> i appreciate the opportunity to communicate with the kennedy and provide this information. it's been a good learning experience. this will be good communication going forward. i don't know if i am looking forward to the performance review when i come back but i guess this would be the form to do that. .. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate the opportunity to be here on behalf of 19,000 car dealers in the country. in this difficult moment, we now difficult the economy is. if a dealer is able to keep his

door opened, make the payroll, keep his customers coming in, i know there are other elements that play into it, but that is important to remember once we look at this. >> thank you for giving me the opportunity today. >> thanks for letting me come. i think i had a story, and i think everybody here today has the story. it is not have the time. thank you very much for listening to me. >> i would close with a rhetorical question, and that would be, with all these closings, will other makers go to these institutions that have facilities available and bring their new products and convey them to the public's instead of

the established makers? thank you very much. >> that concludes our questioning and concludes our hearing. i want to thank all of our witnesses for coming today and for your testimony. and testimony that committee rules that the committee members have 10 days to submit additional questions for the record. all of the exception of one and three be entered into the record and any redacted a permission proprietary to law-enforcement sensitive that without objection all documents will be entered into the record. we are turned. we are adjourned. >> you can watch this house hearing again and others on the gm and chrysler dealerships closures at c-span.org.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] >> tonight on c-span, and look at recent developments in healthcare and the economy, and later, a discussion on minorities and health care disparities. and you have another chance to see the house hearing on general motors and chrysler dealership closures. >> next, a conservative perspective on health care and the u.s. economy. from "washington journal, " this is almost 40 minutes. host: our guest, rush ponnuru -- rahm-ponnuamesh ponnuru.

>> people will also say that the deficit and the debt are skyrocketing, and that is the reason why we cannot afford to do health reform. i just want to repeat, the single biggest problem we have in terms of the debt and the deficit is health care. is medicare and medicaid. that is -- when you hear all these projections about all these trillions of dollars and red ink got 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 faster than inflation. host: what is your reaction to the president's speech yesterday? guest: there is no question that health care expenses are a big driver of federal debt and federal deficits, but i think what he said is true but it is

misleading because his plans and the plans being circulated on capitol hill by his allies, do not have much in the way of cost control. it is hard to come up with an example of a country that has expanded coverage while cutting costs. he may talk a lot about cost control, but the driving force on capitol hill is to expand coverage and that will cost serious money. host: what do you envision health care reform looking like? guest: i would like to see an end to the tax penalty for buying insurance policies yourself, as opposed to getting them through your employer, so a switch away, at least a gradual switch away from employer-based insurance to individually purchased insurance, along with forms to be able to buy more affordable product on the market.

host: the republican-202-737- 0001, and democrats is 202-737- 0002. for independents, 202-628-0205. you have been writing about health-care concerns. there is a lot of talk right now of course about how the government will be feeding into this. do you see any of the plant on the table right now, being able to work out a compromise with what you're looking at? accusing the democrats will be able to negotiate blue dog coalition? guest: i think the democrats are not particularly eager for the -- i think that is understandable. they have huge margins in congress, if they want to go with what they think is the ideal policy and shut out the republicans, that is something that they can do.

host: an opinion piece in "the wall street journal," the cost estimates for the democrats' health care reform have hit $1.50 trillion over a decade. guest: that is right, and government estimates tend to be underestimates. almost without exception to the initial estimates people make it and being wildly low. host: you have also been looking of course at the nomination of judge sotomayor. what do you think it -- what effect do you think the words of newt gingrich and rush limbaugh will have on the gop electorate? there has been some backlash by republicans in elected office who are concerned about their comments. guest: newt gingrich initially described judge sotomayor as a racist and back off on that charge, and rus limbaugh has also spent a lot of time talking

about her comments, about how wise latina judge would it -- would eventually make better decisions than a white male judge. i think it is a tricky issue for conservatives, and i think one of the things that is going on here is that this is a huge distraction because in fact, whether or not it makes any sense to think in terms of race and judges this way, i do not think it is even true that her decisions had been affected by her ethnicity. she is in essence a conventional liberal, and if she were a conventional white male liberal, she would be making the same decisions on affirmative action, for example, ended is a mistake strategically for republicans to look at the first latino judge who is nominated, and end of making it a debate about race. guesti think that for senate

republicans who are the key decision makers, that has always been the focus. as they become more the center stage of conservative concern about sotomayor, that is going to happen. host: our first caller is from saginaw, michigan. and it is calling on the democrats' line. good morning. thanks. you are on the air. caller: good morning. i retired from general motors. right now they're taking a lot of stuff away from us. how is this going to help us, this open enrollment or whatever, with health care? guest: i take it that he was wondering how the health care policies i was talking about are going to help. well, i think that the key question actually is not how to

help retirees in these sort of dysfunctional systems that have already set up, but how to transition to a new system that will work better for a new generation. i do not think that anything i have talked about is going to produce any cars for people who have already been in the old system, but to create something new that younger people in particular might be able to find attractive and more affordable. host: our next caller is on the independent line. jordan is calling from portland, oregon. welcome, you are on the air. caller: thank you very much. a i was curious to hear your thoughts on bikes -- >> i was curious to hear your thoughts on the single payer system. why health care for a populace should be considered a matter for private industry, and why we should not look at it more of a

socialist or a public interest standpoint. why should these things be profited upon instead of considered a matter of public interest? guest: well, that is a meet taty question. i think it is a mistake to make this division between profit and the public interest. when of the reasons for markets worked is that the profit motive often serves the public interest. when it has not worked, that is often the result of misguided government policies structuring that market in foolish ways. i think that president obama and a lot of leading democrats made an accurate political judgment that the single payer is too far left for the american public. host: you have criticized deficit spending what do you think the economy doing right now? do you see it improving? d c signs that it might be getting better?

guest: well, people who are paid to the economic forecasters do not all agree on this. there are some green shoots here. i think that in the second half of 2008, the fall of 2008 in particular, you had a real drop in monetary velocity and the speed with which money is changing hands. and you had really a consumer- driven panic, and i think that that has really been subsiding, that consumer confidence is up. i think we are seeing job losses start to decline as well. host: our next call is from the republican line. from ohio. caller: good morning. i really hate to say this, but the ignorance and the stupidity of some people just absolutely astounds me. the single payer system that you have in canada and in europe, they actually have it placed 1.2

billion pounds into that system just to keep afloat because they have all these waiting periods. as a matter of fact, on c-span here the other day, they had a guy -- from england who was crowing about an 18-week waiting period. in canada, people had been waiting for transplants for seven years. you have the epa that they brought up yesterday as a good -- but you have the dea that they brought up yesterday as it possibly -- i have had several surgeries that had had to pay for myself. one, i actually had a bone chard sitting through -- sitting next to a major vein. one bump, and i could have bled to death. the v.a. refused to do the

surgery. you people out there who want all this stuff, you need to wake up. please. guest: when you have a government run health care systems, you can have the saving of money by rationing care. or you can have systems that do not ration care, like medicare, but the cost expenses there go through the roof. host: what exactly is the single payer system? guest: single payer is a euphemism for a national government provision of health insurance. the government pays for all health insurance, there are not any private health insurance companies anymore. you have one entity that pays all the bills. i oppose it because, you know, i think we have got extensive experience that markets work better than government, including health care.

and the single payer system would create all kinds of perverse consequences, including rationing. host: our next caller is on the independent line from new york. is it water leak at? are you with us? i think we have lost him. we will never know. hi there. caller: i am from new york. i would like to know, does the young man had any knowledge as to whether -- i know that in the state of new york, i receive medicare and so did my husband we pay into it because we are both employees of the state or a municipality. what i would like to know is, i found out recently when i tried to pay money back to medicare for something that is run by a

private company and certain areas. i would like to know whether he knows which states or if there are states besides the state of new york that pay a private company to handle medicare and medicaid guest: well, there are all kinds of private participation in the program. for example, medicare part d, which was introduced in 2003 as part of the prescription drug benefit, allows private delivery of services and benefits, but that tends to be decided by the individual. so i am not entirely sure what the caller is asking about. i would have to know a little bit more about the details of her situation. host: our next caller is phillies from kansas city, kansas, on the democrat's lead. caller: good morning. i believe something has to be done with medicaid and medicare, but i also think there has to be something that has to be

regulated somehow with a dental costs to america, in the way prices are quoted to patients because workers are paying for dental costs, but some of these programs are offering 28 e's, which means the patient pays 20% of the bill. then the company pays 80% of the bill. we end up paying more than 20% after what is quoted to us. he has been going on for years, and i think that area needs to be looked at to see what can be done to decrease the deficit in that area. host: well, health in general suffers from a lack of transparent pricing, and i think in large part it is because it

has not been allowed to be a flourishing private market the way other markets are. host: our next caller is jim on the republicans line, calling from leesburg, virginia. caller: good morning. the thing that is a little bit disturbing about this whole debate -- my company does some work with the health industry. people are terrified about what might be coming down the pike. anytime the government gets involved with something, from vdot all the way across the state of virginia, they mess it up. it is frightening to see what this administration is planning. if they start nationalizing industries, it is going to be similar to lawsuits with doctors. doctors are not going into practice because they cannot afford a malpractice insurance. if you nationalize industry, people do not want to be capped on what they can make. in terms of the cost of health care, a lot of the illegal immigrants getting health care in our country, somebody is

paying for that. that money gets recycled back into the industry, it does not just go away. guest: i think that the caller is right that illegal immigration does impose all sorts of costs on people, not just in the health-care area but also in other areas. but of course it is also the tip of an iceberg. we have a dramatically inefficient, wasteful, and dysfunctional health care system, even leaving aside illegal immigration. host: you have mentioned that the republican party is searching for its identity after last fall's election. a usa today poll found 1/3 of republicans have an unfavorable opinion of their party. why might that be? guest: there probably is not a unified critique among that 1/3. some people are upset because they think too many republicans have been to accommodationist,

too liberal, too pro-government. some people are concerned or upset because they think the party is too conservative, maybe too far to the right on social issues, for example. so you have that dissatisfaction, but you do not have that singular focus of opposition. host: how do you think the party can coalesce? guest: i think you are seeing some: lessons in the party. -- obama is replacing bush, so the divisions that were created by bush and the bad memories and so forth are giving way to a sort of unified opposition to the obama agenda. host: do you think health care might be a part of that? it seems like republicans are finding a more unified voice on health care. we had feedback from republicans as president obama went to talk about health care yesterday in