are unhappy because they see it as stepping on their turf. added that that the senate is taking sonia sotomayor a son's nomination up. >> i think the democrats can make an argument that this was timely and targeted. this could actually could be helpful. they could make a case that another $2 billion would continue it. >> corey boles, last word. >> that is a fair observation. i can point and say that this stimulus thing as money going slow at the door, looked at the demand. inmates and chaos, but that means people are actually buying cars. >> corey boles is a reporter for

the dow jones and ken thomas is from the associated press. thank you for joining us on "newsmakers." have a good day. >> george wythe signed a declaration of independence. he was also murdered. tonight, bruce chadwick on "i am murdered." >> minnesota gov. temple it was the keynote speaker -- minnesota gov. tim pawlenty discussing his vision for the republican party. >> thank you for the honor of being with you today. that is very nice. thank you. it is a delight to be with you today. speaking as one voice about the challenges facing our great nation and our party, and looking forward to doing that in a moment. i want to thank my friend and

our leader, chairman steele. your passion and can-do attitude and halt all optimistic attitude is exactly what we need right now. thank you for your tremendous leadership in your service. [applause] i also want to thank the members of the minnesota are in see who are here today. many of you may know about minnesota politics. it is challenging. if you are a republican and minnesota, it's like being a polar bear in miami. it is a tough place to be a republican but there is steadfast leadership and commitment to our principles. that is making a difference. we are moving forward in minnesota. [applause] we have 460 days to go until the 2010 election. there is a lot at stake for the future direction of our respective states and the nation as a whole. we all have work to do and we

can play our part. for me, i am pleased and proud to have just become a vice chair of the republican governors association. i'll be joining the tremendous chair of that, the legendary haley barbour. [applause] we've got both ends of the mississippi covered as we try to return this party to the majority governing party in this nation. i wanna start today with breaking news. you have been in meetings all today. there is news coming across the wire. they are announcing that president obama is making great progress on climate change. he is turning the political climate of our country back toward republicans. [applause] as you know, in the eyes of

many, president obama is cool, cool, cool. but the american people are figuring out he is wrong, wrong, wrong. [applause] this current presidency reflects a collision between the image and personality of president obama and the important lessons of history. as you know, he famously ran on the theme, change we can believe in. now we're starting to understand what he meant. what he meant by that is he was to change what we believe in. the american people in this country ain't biting at. we remember that he was a community organizer and as prior life. we need to remind president obama forcefully and strongly that the federal government is not our definition of community.

[applause] there are some commentators and observers saying that they do not think that president obama knows what he is doing. i disagree with that. from the liberal perspective, he knows exactly what he is doing. he is in the process of unleashing a flood of federal spending, and the greatest expansion of the federal government in the modern history of this country. it is time that we stand up to president obama. it is time we stand up for our principles. it is time that we stood up as the republican party for the american people and taxpayers across this great land. [applause] that is going to require us as republicans to be more than just that critics in chief. our strategy cannot be, we hope the other side messes up. we've got to be a party that is

offering hall full and meaningful and optimistic and positive solutions for the real challenges of this country and the real concerns of our fellow citizens. we need to stated boldly. i wanna tell you a true story about a construction worker who was working in suburban chicago, paul water tower. he was in a safety harness but he needed a tool out of his reach. he unwisely unhooked his safety harness and reached for the tool. unfortunately he tell the full length of the water tower. surprisingly and miraculously he landed in a large and somewhat soft pile of dirt. he not only survive but he essentially escaped even serious injury. for a while it looked great. the ambulance and emergency medical workers were scrambling to respond to this crisis. as they were picking him up generally and tenderly at the dirt, they put him into a burning that was no more than three of 4 feet off the ground. as they were loading them onto

the gurney, he was heard to say, please don't drop me. please don't drop me. as republicans, we have already had our fault. we need to get of the political posttraumatic stress syndrome of being so apologizing and discouraging about our future. we need to move forward with strength and confidence that our party has got a right ideas and values moving forward. let's move forward. [applause] as you know, political movements who dare to speak the truth can inspire great change. history has taught us that clearly and repeatedly. one example that we can learn from as a lesson is the polish independence movement. i great -- i have great part -- pride in this story because of my polish heritage. as you will recall, the polish

independence movement sparked a fall of the entire soviet empire. they adopted as their slocan a simple, common-sense, basic, true proposition, and it was, 2 + 2 = 4. that bar of that frightening sentiment from george orwell's "1984" that the state tells you that = 5, it equals five. if the state tells you that it equals three, it equals three. we need to speak the truth. our truth -- our principles and i you resonate with the american people because they are not born of pop psychology. these are time tested license -- lessons based on life.

they have served as well in history. they will continue to serve as well as a political movement and as a party but we need to embrace them clearly and boldly. we need to know what we believe, and importantly, why do we believe that, and then we have had the ability to communicate and educate and motivate and mobilize and change those sentiments in the political action and the ability to govern and to lead. that is why we do what we do. and for all of us, part of what we believe is who we are and where we come from. we have that as our experience, a lens to which we view a lot of the been circumstances. i cruel and a little place in minnesota, a suburb right side of st. paul. when i grew up, it was a, some of the world's largest we packing plants and the world's largest dockyards for a while. it was very much of blue-collar town. it said down precipitously.

it was an enormous economic dislocation in my home town with a lot of moms and dads being laid off. a lot family's been disrupted because of that. but he was a great community. a great place to grow up. i want to tell you about my family about the challenge that we have in front of us as the republican party. my oldest sister continues to work as the secretary for administrative assistant for company for 40 years are more in the same job. my elder brother worked for most of his career as a member of the united food and commercial workers. part of that time as a union organizer and union steward working in the produce department of progress restore. he worked there for 40 years up. my other brother worked for another -- a number of years in the oil workers' union and now he works for municipalities

ver. my other sister rose is a advocate for children in the public schools and she is a member of that union. you can imagine that the political discussion around my house growing up was a little challenging. but interestingly when we talk about the issues, when we talked about the merits and the values and the beliefs of what we stood for, we had a discussion where we will touch on things -- do you really believe we should have our tax is increased? no, we're paying enough. what about education, should we just plow more money into the system or should we be demanding accountability for results and for apartments -- performance? that sounds good. what about health care? you want the government taking that over, or should the decision be made by you and your doctor? i am with you on that.

what about the hot-button issues? what about the guns in the second amendment rights? we liked hot and fish. don't mess with our guns. what about protecting life? we respect that. how come you are democrats? well because you republicans coming your not for the working person. you were not for us. have you ever heard that? still hear that? of course we do. our challenge in our opportunity is to show people like my family, then called reagan democrats, now like to call them sam clubs republicans -- and what it called on that? for this reason peoplreason. . in target is a minnesota company. if you shop at these stops, you do not have as much money as you

would like for you have a limited amount of money. you don't have more money to spend you shop there because you want good value for the money that you do spend. that is a good sentiment for us as people. people do not want to spend more on government. they want good value for the money that they do spend. we need to communicate how our conservative ideas and principles and values translate into a meaningful opportunity for them. what do we believe? we believe that the success of our nation rides on the growth of private enterprise, not the growth of the government. [applause] we believe in a limited any effective government. one of the most important things they government needs to do, we're not anti-government. we are anti-lousy results.

tyranny can take the form of a bundle in but well-meaning effort that strangles the entreprenuers real spirit in america. history shows that weakness and a quick question -- any equivocation -- diplomacy only works if that is backed by street. we believe that real community is most often found in our families, and our churches, and in our places of worship, in our neighborhoods, and even in individual acts of kindness and concern and love and caring. and most importantly, we believe in the paramount significance of freedom and liberty. we are not a great nation because died just happened to make us smarter than everybody else on the face of the earth. we are a great nation because we

are the freest people whoever had the privilege to live in this great nation. [applause] and that is important because freedom allows ordinary people to do extraordinary things. it allows us to invent, it allows us to innovate, it allows us to dream, it allows us to create, for it allows us had aspirations and the pursuit of happiness that is different from the rest of the war. it gives us a tremendous advantage. it amplifies and celebrates the human spirit. we have led opportunity to showcase that as american -- as republican. we want to be free to be on enter your -- to be entreprenuers without being beaten down by heavy hand of regulation. we want to be free to choose our own doctors. we want to be free from the weight of the crushing debt that

the federal government is dumping on us, with no real concern about how it is going to be paid back either by us or for that matter, our children and grandchildren and their children. we want to be free to send our children to the school of hard choice that suits the needs of our family. i don't believe and you don't believe that nobody should be forced have a child go to a bad school. [applause] so how do we apply that to the emerging issues, but topical issues of our time? in that time that i have, but it's touch and a few examples. one is clearly spending. one is a situation where our federal parliament does not even trying were seriously pursue the goals of balancing the federal budget. we need to tell the truth. you cannot defy the financial laws of gravity and not have to come back and haunt us in ways

that are are terrific. we're going have the federal government equivalent of a mortgage meltdown if we do not get a hold of this and begin to change it. let's also tell the truth. it hasn't mattered at times if we send republicans or democrats at a white house, but trend line has been mostly up. if we wanted be the party of fiscal discipline, then we have to walk along a wall. when we seen that our team to washington under the banner of the republican party, we need to expect and demand that they do that. and we lost our way. [applause] now the american people are tightening their belts and being asked to live within their means, and they are not seen wage increases or they are experiencing wage concessions, layoffs, furloughs, living on

less for now and they expect and understand that government should do the same thing, and we should. we should deliver that to the american people. the only thing growing faster than the federal government's deficit is chris matthews man crush on barack obama. [applause] president obama said in a recent interview that we are out of money. we don't have any more money. with all due respect, mr. president, if we are out of money, stop spending it. [applause] in the war on spending, president obama is a pacifist. [laughter] this is unlike the minnesota experience. i am not proud of the fact that my state has had a very robust spending pattern throughout its history. but we have begun to change that

trend line. minnesota has been a state for 150 years. we celebrated our subsequent annual -- sesquicentennial a few years ago. spending by government in the state of minnesota act -- never actually went down until i became governor. we have controlled spending and ashley have cut it in real terms for the first time in 150 years. [applause] we also had longstanding goal to get minnesota at least at a top 10 in taxes. can we at least get out of the top 10? a couple of years ago, the department of labour said that minnesota got out of the top 10 in taxes. i think we got to a 11th, but we're making progress. i also attach briefly on health

care because it is so important. let's not just be the party that we're not going to do anything. clearly that help -- health care system is broken. we have families and small businesses and counties and states and the federal parliament, are a financial backs broken by the crushing weight of the cost of this current system. as we do that, we have to be truth tellers and beat commonsensical. listen to the rationale for the obama health care system. it basically is this. we're point to control costs by spending more. that's like saying, we're going to balance the checkbook by writing more checks. it ain't going to work. this is a scheme that would make bernie madoff bless. it is not going to work. another part of the plan -- and i was not going to all of it -- but they want to create a so-

called government option to compete with the private sector in providing health care services. the justification, the rationale for that is that we want to keep "the private sector" honest. ponder that for a moment. what is next, chairman steele? if the price of toilet paper is too high, if the price of the odor to pace is too high, if the price of towels are too high, is the government going to start a dollar met wal-mart corke target or costco to keep prices down? if we don't like the price of potatoes, will the federal cover the start of potato farm to keep a tight of farmers on this? it is an absurd proposition. we need to fight that. what can we do as republicans affirmatively, positively? here are a few examples that we

should join together on health care reform on these things on a bipartisan basis. we need to get rid of a joke lawsuits and have a tougher standards for medical malpractice claims. [applause] we need to weed knowledge that if you get sick, that's not preclude you from getting insurance in the future. we need to prohibit and limit the ability of insurance company the box people out of the insurance system just because of a pre-existing condition. we need have what is called portability, so that in this mobile society, people switch from job to job and do not have to risk losing their insurance every time they move jobs. we need portability of the insurance product. we need to switch the system from plane from volume of procedures to pay for better health care and better outcomes. we have done that in minnesota and it works dramatically. if we're paying for volume of procedures, what will we get? volumes up procedures.

if we want better -- we should pay for better health, outcomes. if we can get people to the best care, we can get not only better health come out form -- better health care outcomes but more efficiency. why sit side -- why should i in minnesota be limited in purchasing choices to adjust your state? in the world of the internet, why can i go on and by my insurance with competing entities in california or vermont were germany or wherever i feel like it? what is that government have to tell me that my market is the three semi-monopoly health care insurance companies in minnesota? let's open that up. the list goes on. there are loads of things that we can do to improve the system. and i want to touch on foreign affairs. we have as a first priority and

first responsibility to protect and defend this nation and its people. like you, i am worried about the threats that this nation faces. we need to remember that pretty speeches don't defeat or intimidate tyrants and dogs. we need to make sure that we remember that it is a weakness that tense our enemies. we have a situation now where president obama recently said that he believes iran has a right to develop nuclear energy, as long as it is for civilian purposes. nuclear capabilities as long as it is for civilian energy purposes. let me see if i've got this straight. president obama will not allow america to expand and develop nuclear energy but it is ok for iran to do it? [applause] we need to stand with our friends who share our values and principles. we need to keep our guard up.

there are troubling signs on their rights and and hints that maybe the administration will reconsider the anti-missile capabilities that had been planned with poland and the czech republic. we have allies they stick their necks out for us like that and take a significant internal shin kicking about deploying those times of capabilities, and you cannot pull the rug out from underneath them. when you look at the defense budget, you see things like missile defense capabilities be potentially reduced in funding in alaska and other places at a time when north korea and iran are more and more of a threat. the see a situation where the proposals to cut discretionary spending were 80%, coming out of the department of defense, misplaced priorities given all the other to be things that the american government funds. we as republicans must apply the

values that founded our party and made our nation great and guided it through all these years. as you know, i am a republican in a traditionally democratic state. we are able to cut the size of government and contain our tax burdens and moved minnesota at the top 10%, and reform our health-care system, even with a divided government. we need that kind of renewal in washington. we need that strong republican voice in washington, d.c. so that's a cut -- conservative solutions can address these problems. we're going to need in our state capitals all across this nation. the respect of the people who do not agree with us is also an important part of moving toward. we need not to become more like democrats but get them to see the wisdom in value of supporting us. as ronald reagan said, someone who disagrees with as 80% of the time is not our enemy.

they are our friend. we need a coalition that says we're going to be the republican party, strong and proud, but we will have room for conservative democrats and independents so that we can govern with that coalition in mind. let's be proud of who we are in believe what we believe. let's make sure that we welcome others who are not yet republicans for the opportunity experience our values and principles. we lead our nation to the civil war and ended slavery. we're conservatives and led the market in free-market solutions that created the greatest market in the world. we are americans and know that every challenge today opens the door to another opportunity and a brighter future tomorrow. applying those principles to the issues of our times i think is our great opportunity. it is what we ourselves as a party, is what we owe our nation and the future. nothing less. thank you for the chance to

speak today. they keep what you do for our party and our conservative movement. -- thank you for what you do to our party and our conservative movement.

>> later that day, the democratic national committee released a response to gov. pawlenty's speech. where we stand on the health care legislation now? >> as we head into the traditional congressional recess, president obama has made some great progress. fourcoittees have passed versios

of health care reform bill. it is important to note that i was not quite the deadline he was hoping for. he had really won both houses to voted on the set -- both for and on the floor. >> what happened on friday night? >> after two weeks of wrangling, some of them public and a lot of it behind closed doors, one committee was able to strike a number of compromises with conservative democrats on that panel. they are known as the blue dog. .

the problem is that they have been trying out for a few months and have not been able to reach it. they say that they need more time. the latest we have heard is that they have been given a deadline of september 15. we will see if they can make back. >> your story talk in general about the campaign against the president's health-care reform. who is leading that battle, and what is their strategy? >> it is a different environment than 1993 with the clintons, because you have many industry players who oppose the legislation back then trying to participate and be a part of this process. but you certainly see objections from them on some of the specific proposals. so we have seen advertising from the insurance industry around some aspects, also the chamber of commerce, the federation of

independent business, retailers, the organizations that have had significant problems with some of the proposals, and have also made traditional ideological groups, more ideological organizations, citing with the republicans saying they did not like the shape of the legislation so far. >> last week, a reaction appeared to be leaning - 2 president's plan. any change in that? >> i think more than anything, what we have seen in surveys and focus groups and talking to people in america is that right now, they are confused by all of the messy business in washington, not clear on exactly what they come out of this process, and they are also feeling anxious. for 180 million americans who have some health insurance today, they are concerned it will cost them a good bit more

money or that the quality of their care might go down. so they are feeling a great bit of unease as to what the impact might be on their everyday lives. >> will we see a health-care plan sometime this year? >> if i knew the answer, i would be making a lot more money. it is difficult to predict. obama has made significant progress, and he does have a democratic congress, so that should be a help to him. you see more people this time around talking about the need for reform, but it gets difficult when you come to specifics. >> thank you for your time. at the table now, mark plotkin, analyst for wtop radio here in washington d.c., and tony fratto, former deputy press

secretary from the bush administration, 2006-2009. a headline today says that pelosi is selling the health plan. what do you see happening around the country in this important month of august? all of the sudden, politics is important. >> yes. you will see members of congress from both sides of the aisle out there trying to talk to people in their district. you will see a lot of campaign- style ads to sway public opinion for and against what the president is trying to do on health care reform. so we will have something to follow this august. >> but will it take for republicans to win this battle of words? >> winning might be the wrong

word. republicans do want some kind of reform. they want to push that message. the problem now is they do not have a unified building can talk about and sell to citizens across the country. there is still more sausage making efforts that we usually see in washington coming right to the front doors of americans right now. >> let me read something from this "washington post" peace. nancy pelosi has become a liability. her popularity is waning, affecting her ability to legislate with in her own caucus. the closest we get to 2010, the more likely it will be that the district's create separation. first speech to the health-care part of this, and then move it forward. guest: republicans feel they have a political stroke

available to them in terms of if the president does not get the health care reform bill through, then they cannot govern well. in fact, it was centered dement of south carolina who said that this is president obama and waterloo. bill kristol, a republican banker, supposedly, said the we have to kill it. -- republicans thinker. democrats will accuse republicans of using this as a political weapon. i am sure the republicans will say, no, we're just trying to make sure the health care reform legislation in specifics is valuable and worthwhile. in terms of man to plaza, look,

issues from san francisco, a california liberal. brigid in terms of nancy pelosi. the cannot replace ted kennedy, are thor the counterpart for newt gingrich. each party chooses a villain. the try to inspire people by saying that person is the personification of that political party. host: our guest will be here with us for just under one hour. if you want to call in, called this. we have lots more from our guests, but we wanted to hear from the speaker herself. she held a news conference on friday afternoon. here is a minute from that. what she saw as the accomplishments of the session

so far. >> to we are this week in committee about to move closer to health care reform than ever in history. when we have our third committee report on the bill. on that note in passing the renewed csh for clunkers legislation, we go home in august to promote health care reform and informed the public of the considerable accomplishments of this congress. right from the start we passed an economic recovery package, the largest in history. 100 days later, we passed the president's budget. in between the president signed legislation ,schip for children, lilly ledbetter.

our colleagues will address these more specifically. we have the economic recovery act to begin with, helping americans save their homes. edward kennedy served america act. then 100 days later, the budget. the president called for three pillars to turn around economy, investment, education and health care, and a new energy policy for america. we did just that. host: gentlemen, she laid it out there. let's begin with tony fratto. moving on with health care -- has it been a productive congress? guest: they have been able to pass some significant pieces of legislation i'm sure they see as significant for them. by all accounts the should have been able to do that with the large majorities in both the

house and senate. something mark was saying about the leadership in congress and the democratic caucus -- we solve this debate of liberals and moderates and the board. it was a strategy a rahm emmanuel in the election last year to go out and conservative districts and not care to much about where these members were on certain policy issues. there were elected and relatively conservative districts. some of the issues that speaker pelosi highlighted will be problems in 2010. they are forcing these guys to get out and walk the plank on tough issues that they then have to contend with with more conservative or moderate members in their districts. guest: welcome tony is right,

there is a 38-seat majority in the house. they had 60 democrats if you and sanders and joe lieberman. julie berman does stray and try to assert his independence, though. i am old enough -- joe lieberman does a straight and but independently sometimes. but i'm old enough to remember that the party is not a monolith. it used to be that there were a southern committee chairmen on the democratic party, some who were terrible on civil rights, but controlled the flow of legislation. if you look at them in terms of the health reform bill, they are led by liberals such as george miller.

and christopher dodd in the senate. then we have someone like max baucus. it seems to me that what is happening is you have to get 218 and the house and 60 in the senate, and it does not change. they have made some small achievements. it took me about 11 minutes to say one thing they have not done is past the washington, d.c. voting rights act which the republican administration said they would veto. it it passed in the senate with only one democrat leaving. that is max baucus. 21 democrats voted for some gun amendments. in 2007 the bill passed with only six democrats leaving the

fall. that would be a great legislative achievement to provide for the first time voting representation in the district of columbia for the house of representatives. the public does not realize that the 575,000 people in this city do not have a vote in the house. to be fair, there were 22 republicans who voted for it in 2007. in terms of the general tng, it seems to me they always want to get to conference. they want to move the bill. the house and senate bills will be different. then, in conference the president will be acted to try to get his way, and hopefully to progressives, they will get their way. the more conservative elements would drop off. host: on wtop radio, a mark

plotkin host a program at 10:00 a.m. until 12:00 a.m.. tony fratto currently runs a program here in town for crisis management. on the republican line, matt. caller: the far left only represents 20% of the voting population, but somehow they control the lead positions in government. therefore, they write all these bills that 80% of the voters do not agree with. the moderate wing of the democratic party is letting these people running amok. they are blaming republicans for they are blaming republicans for killing the bills it is very frustrating to watch this as a member of the other

80% who does not want to see policies written into bills. how are they it so vocal, 20% of the population? why did they controlled the democratic party -- why do they control the democratic party? guest: well, henry waxman, of the three chairman you might describe, those three committee chairmen are there because of seniority. they got elected and reelected in became chairman. rangel, waxman, and miller. in the middle, senator kennedy would have been chairman of the house committee, and in terms of the finance committee, senator baccus of montana, who many do not believe is a democrat.

independent voters are the most crucial in terms of general elections. as tony said, the legislative process is sausage-making. some good, some bad -- no one will be totally satisfied. but i do think president obama will sign a bill and it will be called "the health care reform bill." not everyone will be happy. but they have been trying to do this since harry truman. guest: the reason that very liberal chairman head committees -- both parties have done an effective job going through redistricting cycles. we re-draw district lines. both republicans and democrats have put keep members in safe districts.

--key members in six districts. that is where the longevity comes from. and addressing your the they lead up to these positions and find themselves out of step with members who come from more competitive districts -- and it keeps them in these positions. guest: it is really the incumbent preservation or both parties make a deal -- do not tamper with my district because we both want to return to serve in office. redistricting is done by state legislatures who are very partisan. it should not be done by political parties, but by private citizens or judges. some who are not so intensely political. host: next call from iowa on the independent line. caller: yes, i have a question

about the public option. it sounded really good when all this began. but i have been hearing reports that is basically nonexistent now. host: can you give us an update? guest: when the speaker of the house was talking about selling the health care bill, still talking about the public option. it is not clear the senate will go for it. it is moving more towards what senate yourconrad is calling healthcare coops. there are proponents in the house for this. it is hotly contested. i look at it from an economic

standpoint. i see it as the first step towards a government-run program. you can call it whatever you like, but it is hard to go out and say the government should not be running your health care at the same time you're proposing government insurance. it will be a dumping ground for businesses. guest: i feel on firm ground if i will quote a nobel laureate. you should read the article it is to labilepaul krugman. i thought it was the clearest explanation. -- if is bypaul klugman. he opened it up by saying that a house member from south carolina was flailed -- look, do not take away my it medicare, thinking it was not a government program. it ensures people 65 and older.

then medicaid it ensures people in terms of health who are very poor. schip is for children. president obama is correct. it makes the private insurance companies honest. it forces them to compete. max baucus does not wanted. it will probably end up with a coop that we do not thathow it work. but making republicans constantly say, look, the government cannot do anything, is terrible, inefficient, wrecking private enterprise -- but they are scared of the efficiency. 47 million people do not have insurance. for the first time america is

trying to cover everyone as an advanced society. not everyone will be covered at the same level and quality, though. guest: guess, we do have a large portion of our population in government health care. everyone agrees that if we're talking about the verypoor, children, seniors, we can all agree that the government should have a role in providing health care. but getting into the vast middle is a problem. especially, if you are going to give an insurance company you will set up -- you will see that program will take all the space because it has advantages and how it defines itself, how it recruits citizens to be part of the program. guest: why are there 47 million

uninsured people? guest: there are lots of reasons, lots of differences among that group. there are different ways to put reform into place. it does not mean you have to put government-run health care in place. guest: why do they refuse people with pre-existing conditions? guest: that is a good question. there's no question that those do cost more to the system. guest: so, they should not have health care? guest: no, i'm not even opposed to a mandate. that said, you need to account for the economics of the delivery. someone has to pay for. who'll pay for the increased costs for someone with a pre- existing condition? it is not free.

that is the debate we need to have. guest: this health care policy is a melange. what you have is that insurance companies are for-profit entities. guest: not all of them. there are many insurance companies out there are already not-for-profit companies. so, why does the government need to come in? guest: but there are a substantial number of large insurance companies for-profit, and doing well. host: let's invite back of years. dallas, tx ,t.j. on the line for democrats. caller: well, i would like to asktony -- i have heard the

same rhetoric. i'm 76 years old. i have heard the same rhetoric forever from republicans, however, it seems to be worse now. now it seems they're totally against anything the democrats stand for. they are so determined to roll back the new deal. they have the right logo. rolling back the new deal? is that right? guest: no, i do not think so. republicans do recognize there is an appropriate role for government in certain cases. it is a rare public official here in washington who will say we should not have some kind of

retirement program, or some kind of health insurance program. the question is, how to do it in the most efficient way? what is the most appropriate role for the private sector? we know that the private sector does deliver services and the most efficient way. host: as a deputy press secretary under president george w. bush, tony fratto had to steer down the washington press corps. you recently said that they are "enablers." guest: i do an award-winning commentary every thursday. you only have to win one award. i will give a shame usplug for

my station. i watched the recent press conference. first of all, i have criticism of the president. before, during the transition, he would come out and never let the appointees speak. i found that to be a bit odd. i am old enough to remember presidents the mortgages. moving to what you asked, i remember a time when the might yes, presidents have it favors, but people would raise their hands, and the president would call on people. he did not have a list of the anointed few he would call on. all the press people sit there as a manikins and asked the questions of the day. there are never any surprising questions. they accept this protocol of not asking questions. yes, the president used to call

them favorites. but this almost seems scripted. they are called and told that you will be allowed to ask a question. i think that there should be a rebellion. some courageous press person should stand up and say, mr. president, i have a question. the worst offender is robert gibbs, the press secretary, who only calls on the tv people in a row, asks them to do follow-up questions, and then anyone considered obstreperous -- so, i think they are enablers. they let president obama dictate the subject of the day. there really is not the performing of their role. host: you sat in the room and worked with the last president. ah m theyannequins, these press

people? guest: no, they are at the top of their profession. there are enormous changes going on in news media. for one thing, there are fewer people in the room there are fewer members of the white house correspondent a suspicion than 20 years ago. guest: why? didn't president bush do the same thing? the names, there really is offensive to me, that certain people are anointed to speak and the others are supposed to sit there and not ask a question. guest: the people who are called the and do not know ahead of time they will be -- the guest: you never called announcement to entertain a question? guest: no, but the president did

have a listing would work from. you would see movies about this. you see this incredibly chaotic scene of people jumping up in their seats. guest: that is what a free press is supposed to do. a rebellion, a revolution. guest: but they do ask pretty good questions. gues you obviously had a role in planning it and i do not mean in the conspiratorial fashion. are there certain people you: and certain people you will exclude? guest: there are limited number of news organizations. . .

obama's answers are so much longer. guest: if you go to the daily briefing, the atmosphere is suffocating, horrible. it is not an exchange of views at all. i would like to see a president consummates enough to just take questions, not know where they're coming from, and it can be of little friends say, because that is what a free press is supposed to look like. -- it could be a frenzy. caller: good morning. i would like to comment on the health-care issue. one of your guests mentioned the word bill, and how parties need someone to put the bill out so they can from their case. what seems to me is going on is that the democratic party, along with the president, has decided

insurance companies are the bad people. as you know meeting about a month ago with drug companies and insurance companies, they seem to work out a deal with the ena and drug companies. for whatever reason they couldn't do it. since you won't do what we need you to do, we are going to call you the villan. that seemed a little over simple to me. i have never heard of insurance companies making a profit. we never heard of the gouging on the profits. why would they make out the insurance companies to be the bad guys. the math doesn't work.

if you can explain it. >> you are right. the ama which was against medicare in 1965 is supporting it. they made some cost concessions. the insurance company is the easy target. what they want to do so say, look, some of the practice that insurance companies have done just won't be allowed in a capitol is tick system because we are excludeing people. we want everybody covered. that's the concept. >> one of the biggest problems we have is accidental history. this goes to the post war period

of price control, wage controls where employers needed to find some other way to compensate workers and couldn't do it through wage increases and added on health insurance benefits. that's why we have this system. the difference is that americans buy the other incidences themselves. the difference is that most americans never see or have the choices. they have the offers their employer is able to negotiate for them and never see the cost of what is being paid.

host: there was a plan to tax benefits. 47 million people don't have insurance. the labor unions which are a big factor didn't want this. harry reid said he didn't want this. that's why it doesn't exist. there's a case to be made for taxing "cadillac plans." ahead of goldman sax. >> that's actually the royals

royce plans. they are such a tiny part. caller: as an independent, i feel both parties are going down the road. what should happen is you should designate who is universal. 18-64. from there, you establish a health saveings account for each person and attach their children under 18 to each one of those. you take the medicare money that's going out. the $260 billion a year and

credit that to each person 18-64. from there, their employer, whatever they are kicking in can also be credited to that account. host: financing healthcare. complicated stuff here. what's the best approach? >> it is really tough. on financing medicare, it has been a successful program but not one that has done much to obtain cost. it has actually been a cost driver. it has proved to be completely impossible to rid of waste and high expense and wasted views. each time the government tries to put in place measures to cut

spending as they are talking about doing today, congress comes back when it is time to make the cut, it repeals it. it's difficult to manage cost. to raise revenues. some would have to come from general revenues. i really believe in making the tax treatment of health insurance between individuals and employer provided coverage. it's a clear way to do it. >> he wanted to say that those people who made over $280,000 would have to pay more. but 95% of the population wouldn't. i guess they are go have to be realistic. if i'm ready to pay taxes so

more people can have insurance. it has to be a cooperative process for people in this advanced society. the only ones in the world that gives themselves that title has everybody insured. it's going to cost them more. now americans are saying, that's the path to socialism or european social welfare. if you are going to provide these benefits, you have to pay for them. in some way, i don't think the president or either party has been straight up about saying if you want these benefits, you have to pay for them in a certain way. it's not an image yik bullet. even has to bear the burden.

host: it looks like we'll be debating this for about a month or two. >> host: it's pointing out that there are 1.5 billion people in the country. calls are out to pass an extension yet again. >> absolutely. people who don't have money to eat and live are going to take other means. in the past, the economy has recovered so thatñw the benefi haven't been exhausted to the same degree and haven't had to be extended. when do you say to these people.

many of them, it's not like they walked off their jobs. they have to be sustained. >> i think congress will probably pass an extension again. they probably will pass an extension. people need to under the trade offs. it will -- a lot of those people who have fallen off the employment roel. we can expect unemployment to stay in a double digit for some time. >> people need to understand the

states vary. what is given in mississippi in terms of longevity. host: caller, you are on the air. caller: it took a long time. thank you. the point you need to realize. healthcare. something needs to be done about it. i'm a truck operator. i own one truck now. i heard both you talking. do any one of you guys know anybody personally that had insurance that needed surgery done and couldn't get it done but they have been paying into their system all their life.

found out they were going to die in 30 days. this is what is happening in america right now as we speak. people are crying, people are dying because they can't get a surgery done. why don't everybody man up -- i'm going to tell you what healthcare is about. it's about racism and race. you got the spanish over there covering for minimum wage and you are saying we are not covering them. let's be real. don't worry about this coming from a black man but worry about this coming from#g an american o wants to help everyone. >> i know someone who lacked health insurance and did get

medical procedure that seems to be the more usual situation. we do pay for the procedures of those without insurance. we all pay in different ways whether it is in higher taxes for government run programs or higher premiums. hospitals do get funding to provide these services. they generally do especially when it is a life-threatening situation. host: hospitals get money in lew of "uncompensated care." the problem is that people who don't have insurance defer getting treated because they can't pay for the treatment. the emergency room in all of the urban hospitals becomes the primary provider. by the time they get to the emergency room, it gets to the

point where it is too late. here is a piece in the "washington post." we started our program this morning about this. he is writing to the congress. time to move on. stop worrying about what the c. i. a. did in the past. time to move on. we took some calls on this this guest: he was a former member of congress, a former chief of staff in the clinton administration. he wants to go forward. i cannot completely agree with that. i think there were probably things done in the previous id ministration that should be scrutinized and that there are culpable people who went beyond protecting the national security. i think most hit cases should be

prosecuted. guest: as leon panetta said, we are a country at war in dangerous times. it seemed like the director is trying to protect the country. i would hope that the attorney general is in the piece, as well. caller: the only problem i have with you is that you probably do not drink enough coffee.

coffee. >> my wife would disagree with you. caller: the percentage of profit that health insurance companies make. no one looks at who is wording all these bills and how all of these are expected. talk about bringing up the past. one thing i do know about ted kennedy, i have never had the issue. him and chris dodd were once the bread ends of a waitress sand witch in rhode island. chris dodd gets a favorable loan from country wide who is now out

of business. he wrote the mortgage law was barny frank. i live in a state in a city near buffalo, which is the fourth poorest in the country. now they are going to complain about this bonus paid to this guy. we have millionaires leaving the state by the droves. i am reasonably employed. for how long, i don't know. like i said, the fourth poorest city in the country. millionaires are leaving. one point i think will be up rising. there's going to be a strike by california unions. this is going to be one of these water shed moments. unions are killing us right now. new york has 130,000 people -- state workers that are

unemployed. >> that was an assembly of a lot of different thoughts. noeg has been said about the loan from country wide. chris dodd is down in the polls. there is a problem with committee chairman becoming too cozy with the industries that they are regulating. the whole profusion of political action committees that there is supposedly vol untarry contributions. dodd was considered too cozy with the companies. he's also chair of the banking committee of the company he was supposed to chair and have oversight. the ultimate punishment was the

non-election or running a very, very tough campaign where before you had a very easy campaign. 0 host: back to the op ed piece. do you think no laws were broken or that the laws don't apply to the executive branch? >> i think the executive branch went through the process of getting an executive opinion as to when was legal and what was not legal. that was the appropriate way to go about it. i believe that the legal opinions were sound. unless there are cases of individuals who violated the law as it was laid out, these people were following the law. we have to remember, what they were trying to do, which is to find the individuals and gather

information. these people are heroes for trying to protect this country and trying to ensure that we have another terrorist attack in this country. these same people and some at the fbi disrupted another potential terrorist plot in north carolina in resent weeks. these people are getting up every morning and night with the idea of trying to find those individuals who would try to harm and kill americans. host: scott on the independent line. good morning. caller: just wanted to say we cannot continue going forward with the american public being deprouded by the health insurance industry. as far as industry is concerned. american businesses can look to the bankruptcies of gm and chrysler and see why there's a

reason why they were buried under the burden of the healthcare industry. health insurancers in particular who have 31% of waste being lost and theirover head and massive salryes. if it's possible for us to compete in global industry, it's only possible for health insurancers. there's a reason why most other large nations has done away with health insancers. appreciate it. host: michigan now on the democrat line. you are on. caller: hello. i have a question about the health insurance companies. they say they keep costs down.

i have heard no vehicle that's been put in place to see they do this. if they pinky swaer, that's not enough for me. i watched a hearing from all the representatives. they said they would still drop people if they became ill. they made their money by their paying in. i don't know why there's an issue. these people need some competition. >> there are ways to get competition and ways to deliver so that they can compete for americans in a way that can increase cost so that everyone gets covered. the easiest thing for most people to say is let's just let the government do it. we have to understand there are enormous costs not just in terms

of how many dollars there are to do it but in terms of the treatment of americans and the care they are going to get. host: some criticism given to the democrats not leaving too much up to congress. when do you make of that? >> the example is the clinton healthcare plan where they wrote the plan and presented it to congress and said here it is. pass it. they took the alternative, which is let congress come up with a plan and now we are becoming very washington in this conversation. where he will get into the specifics is in the conference committee. the house version will be different from the other version. i think he will dive in at that

point and say this is acceptable, this is not. this is acceptable. this is not. his impact will be felt during the conference committee, not in the house. host: presidential politics, washington times front page. what should, if anything, be different about the way your party goes about its business? >> that is such a long way off. they have to. they have to plan for their primaries. if you remember in the last cycle, there were a lot of states rushing to the front of the line to try to have as big an impact as they could on the presidential nomination process. it's difficult. you have states with tradition and some state was schedules that they need to maintain. whatever cast of potential

candidates are out there they are going to adapt to the primary schedule. the election schedule will start earlier. it will be more expensive as it always is. it will be an incredible test of the eventual nominee. at the end of the day, the primary schedule hasn't really altered who the eventual nominee or candidate is. host: in kaufl a talk about the future there. here's what he has to say. >> i want to talk about some breaking news. there's some developing news coming across the wire and tv sets. apparently, they are announcing that president obama is making great progress on climate change. he's turning the political climate of our country back towards republicans. [applause]

host: would he make a good -- a tough opponent for president obama in 2012? >> not presently. he's trying to be this sort of wal-mart, working class republican. i don't think it would ring very well. he's from minnesota, which is a democratic state. it's very open. i'm sure because he's not running for reelection views himself as presidential. i don't see it. host: too early to name names? >> too early. i have enormous respect for the governor of minnesota. he's a terrific representative of the party. host: one last call on the issues of the day.

mary from florida on the republican line. caller: the abortion issue. clinics will close here if they pass this. what happens if i like my insurance. i don't want any other insurance. i'm on medicare too. >> they can't take your medicare away. that is a government program. the government pays for medicare. a lot of medicare users don't realize that. this is a perfect example of a government program that -- i started the conference with this -- that cannot be taken away from you. if you are over 65, you get medicare, period. >> the number of seniors who think that medicare is not a government program or that it

can be taken away is really tiny. most seniors i've come across know exactly what medicare is and who pays for it and how it is paid for and what they get for it. in terms of a choice for healthcare for those below the age ever 64 or 65 and eligible for medicare. if there's a public option, lue see employers making that the only option for employees. there will be changes that will make that economic decision to dump their employees into the public plan. that probably won't be the best thing for those workers. host: tony, a contributing editor for cnbc and

>> tomorrow, congress daily looks at how members of congress will discuss health care during the recess. stuart taylor, senior, isthmus from -- soon lit -- a senior columnist, secretaries gates. a talk about health care, cal and trade, the sotomayor nomination, and the agriculture bill. and the independent community bankers association talks about the economy and the emerging role of independent and community banks. live at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c- span. >> up next,