immoral? mr. mccain: as i recall, that's exactly it. i think the senator from new hampshire recalls that debate.@ . >> less than one-tenth of 1% of believe that was. it was opposed aggressively by the aarp and opposed by the other side of the aisle. do you know what that change is going to be? it is going to require that wealthy people who benefited from the party drug benefit would have to pay part of their premium, rather than get it all for free. it would have to actually contribute to the health care drug benefit, assuming he is on part b. as a practical matter, it was a

very reasonable amendment. . over the first ten years of this bill, $3 trillion cut in medicare, $3 trillion over the first 20 years of this bill, $3 trillion, when we already know that medicare, according to this chart, is insolvent to the extent of of $38 trillion, insolvent. and yet, we're going to take this money out of medicare, as the senator from arizona has pointed out, and we're going to fund a brand-new entitlement, a brand-new entitlement. we're going to expand medicaid to 133% of poverty with this money and we're going to create this brand-new entitlement which has nothing to do with medicare, nothing to do. none of the people that are going to get this benefit probably have ever paid in to the hospital trust fund which is what funds medicare. that seems totally inconsistent with the purpose of medicare. isn't medicare to benefit -- shouldn't medicare funds benefit

medicare recipients, i would ask the senator from arizona, who is the republican leader? so if there are going to be reductions in medicare, it should go to make medicare more solvent, not to create a new entitlement? mr. mccain: one would think so. could i -- could i go to the -- there's two doctors in the united states senate. there's two -- there's lots of lawyers. there's two doctors. both of them have had hands-on experience. i don't know if dr. barrasso has seen this morning's "new york times". my other favorite source of news, information, and opinion. on the front page this morning, "home care patients worry over possible cuts." the purpose, i understand, of health care refor [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2009] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute]

>> the story in the paper is very similar to many of the patients i've taken care of and the families in wyoming who depend on this. there is a picture of her meeting with her nurse. she greets the nurse who has come to check her medication that she takes. and she says that those visits that been highly effective in keeping her out of the hospital. i mean, that's the whole idea -- keep them out of the hospital so they can lower the cost of care. the home care she receives could be lowered under the legislation passed by the house and pending on the senate floor today. now, the legislation would reduce medicare spending on home

health services, which is a lifeline for homebound medicare beneficiaries, which keeps them out of hospitals and also out of nursing homes. so there you have it. what could be better for our seniors than for them to be in the dignity of their own home, someone coming into their home to help them and make their lives better? that will include therapy, sometimes language therapy, different medical social services. that's where the care ought to be given, in the home. that's what we want for our seniors. dignity at home, opportunities at home, to stay in surroundings, but also that's not just for all seniors like bertha, we want that for all seniors. that's why we need this amendment that says don't cut the care for our seniors. we certainly do not want to

start a new program. which an article by the dean of johns hopkins medical center -- "this could hurt medicare patients." so they are using this in a way that will make it worse for people on medicaid as they dump 15 million people on to this system that is absolutely broken. >> well, i yield to my colleague from arizona. >> if it is taken out of your time, just as it was for someone who asked yesterday. >> i don't mind if it is taken out of my time. >> i ask unanimous consent that the senator's time not be taken out of the time that's allotted to us. >> do the senators know that yesterday the association for

home care and hospices, the umbrella organization for home care and hospice organization, wrote a letter to me? it says for all these reasons we support provisions of your health care reform legislation as they relate to home health care. i won't read it all. is the senator aware of that letter? >> is the senator -- my response is, i don't know what their thinking is. i don't know what deal has been cut. the senator's office says the deal was cut with the pharmaceutical companies and the deal was cut with the a.m.a., and the deal was cut with the hospital association. but i know what the effect is. i know what the effect is -- the bill would slice $55 billion over 10 years from projected medicare spending on home health services while the senate version would take $43

billion, but i don't know what the deal was that was cut over where the white smoke comes out. i know what the deal was with farma. they told them they would oppose drug importation from -- importation from canada. so i don't know what the deal was that was cut that bought them, but i know deals have been going on, i know they are unsavory, and i know people like the lady that was just referred to, bertha, they are not interested in seeing their health care change. i don't know what the deal was. >> i can tell the senator the deal. i can tell the senator the deal. >> the senator from arizona has the florida. >> i don't know what the deal was, but we'll find out what the deal it was.

it is full of lobbyists. i can't walk through the hallway here without bumping into one of their lobbyists. if the senator keeps interrupting, he doesn't know the rules of the house. >> if the senator -- >> i would like to finish my answer, if i may. i don't know the deal that was cut with them, but i know bertha mill yard -- milliard was not there when the deal was cut. >> the senator from montana. >> does the senator know the so-called deal was whereas mepac and the house wanted to make drastic cuts to health care that we went to the home health care industry, worked with them and took two of their major suggestions?

so we mod -- modified, and the home health industry thought this was reasonable. does the senator know that was reached? >> i don't know what the deal was, but i know that the people who were in the home health care business that see $43 billion in cuts to their business, funding for their business, were not there when the lob yifts showed up. we heard the story when the majority of the people said, get on board, or when we go and shape the final parameters of this bill, we're going to hurt you. we know they have been threatened. >> i'm just wondering if that was the deal. we know there are a lot of deals around here. i know the senator from arizona pays a lot of attention to earmarks, and i know at some point we'll get an amendment, which lists all these deals, like the deals that got,

allegedly, a few votes on their side of the aisle so we could proceed. do you think it is part of this deal -- if there really was a deal -- that this money would go to benefit medicare recipients? if you are going to take $42 billion out of the medicare money that's going to home health care, shouldn't it have gone to make this system a little more solvent and make sure our seniors have a medicare system that's solvent? take the money from the seniors and give it to somebody pells? shouldn't that have been part of the deal? >> as it has often been said, it is what it is. >> if the deal was made, it wasn't made with everybody. i have a letter dated december 4 to me endorsing the amendment. so they must not have been part of the deal. they represent georgia.

further, in here, they say -- >> they may be on their way up to the senator's office very soon. >> they might be. the reason it is here is they estimate 62 of the medicare-approved home health agencies in georgia will go out of business. so if there was a deal, it wasn't made with every state. i ask unanimous consent this be entered as part of the record. >> wocx -- without objection. >> and if i could follow up on my colleague's comments about what is happening in georgia, i talk today one of the largest home health care providers in florida, and also we have a letter from the "tribune" november 16 where this company says contrary to the other is sergs -- assertion, this scenario could be devastating for older floridians.

more than 60% of florida's home health agencies could be in the red within two years. we are going to take these small businesses, and they will not be able to function because we will take this money out? today in "the new york times" a good point was made. it is not like there are going to be folks who are coming in who will have a new public option or new insurance-backed program, because home health care is for seniors. so what's going to happen? we're going to have our moms and dads benefiting from this health care instead of having to go to a nursing home or assisted living facility away from their home and family, and they are

not going to be able to go anymore. by the way, i don't believe that is going to save any money. what i believe that will do is increase costs. we know nursing home care is far more expensive then hospital health care. it is estimated one day of hospital health care is 43 times as much as home health care. so when you get rid of home health care, you are actually going to increase costs. i want to follow up on the comment, if i can, from my friend from new hampshire. i am new hear -- here. everyone needs to know this bill is not going to help seniors at all. this bill takes money from senior health care. if there was a legitimate effort to help seniors, we would take medicare savings and keep the money in medicare. as the leader said, we are

taking the money out of health care for seniors and putting it into this new program. >> and let me remind the senator from montana, there are leaks all over this town, sometimes good news, sometimes bad news, but there was an article where the senator from montana's staff called in all these groups and their high-paid lobbyists and told them not to meet with republicans or if they did, it would be treated as a hostile act. i would be glad to provide that article for the record. i hope it is not true. i think it is. >> home health care is not the only way seniors will be hurt by this. i am quoting from an article by tom scully who was one of the writers of medicare part-d for seniors. in let me quote his article. i ask unanimous consent the entire article be entered in the record. >> without objection. >> he says, "there is a

provision that is intended to save billions of dollars but instead will hurt millions of seniors, impose new costs on taxpayers, and charge employers milleds mills -- millions in new taxes." here is the core of it. he says, quote, "congressional staff, looking for a new way to pay for health care reform, proposed a subsidy to employers. the supposed savings were estimated by congressional staff to be as much as $5 billion over the next decade. it sounds smart, except that nobody asked how many employers will drop retiree drug coverage. clearly, many will. the result is, instead of saving money, the proposed revenue raiser will force part-d costs to zy rocket as they -- to

skyrocket." he concludes with this comment -- "there is no reason to hurt seniors in the process. businesses have plenty of problems as it is. it makes no sense to make these problems worse." not only are the programs going to be cut, but the drug costs will be dumped into the program with an increased number of people involved." >> i yield for a question to the senator from north carolina and then the senator from tennessee. >> i would take this point and ask this question -- the president set out in this debate and targeted two things -- quality and savings. we were going to save money and maintain quality. would it not be accurate to say when you take money away from home health, that, one, you

remove from that population, that tool that maintains disease , that keeps that from getting worse, and you chase seniors back to the hospitals for the services? so, one, the acue -- acuity of the senior patient is much worse, and two, by the time they get to the hospital, their condition has deteriorated. so we don't decrease the cost, we increase it. from the standpoint of the quality, the outcome for the patient is worse, because we put them in a hospital environment. is it that not worse? >> it seems to me. senator from tennessee. >> i was just watching from in my office, and i'm having a hard time -- >> it is a lot of fun. >> it is a lot of fun. as a matter of fact, i would not

rather be any other place than right here on the floor today talking about the most important piece of legislation we probably will deal with in our tenure here. >> a fight not joined is a fight not enjoyed. >> i can tell you are enjoying this, and i don't think i've ever seen you as happy as you are today in the fight against something that is devastating. senator, i don't understand what it is that would cause my friends on the left, on the other side of the aisle, to throw seniors under the bus. there is no doubt there ought to be changes in medicare to make it more solvent, and i think all of us want to be sure that seniors down the road have the ability to benefit from from medicare. we want to make sure medicare is here for seniors.

i do not understand -- and i listened to the last tegment, my friends -- last segment, my friends on the other side of the aisle -- i do not understand, though, why the body on the left would be willing to throw seniors under the bus. regardless of what you say about this bill, they are being thrown under the bus. dels doctors are going to -- doctors are going to get a 23% cut in a year. what is it that would drive our friends on the left that in the past have supported seniors but today are willing to throw seniors under the bus for a political victory. what is it that's driving that? i do not understand. perhaps my other colleagues can explain it better. i also want to return to the

senator's comment. i go back to my home state of arizona. i talk to the doctors and providers and they say, what's going on? you made a deal to the lobbyists, that's my answer to you. you made a deal with the lobbyists. not the doctors, not the people that are users of pharmaceuticals that this year have seen an 8% to 9% of increase in drugs because your deal is going to protect them. so my answer to you is, i don't know what you bought that letter for, but it probably was a pretty high price. >> would the senator -- >> the senator from arizona has the floor. >> i could answer the senator's question. >> i do know the answer to it. i just gave you the answer. >> i would have to agree with my colleague from arizona. it is astonishing that the senator would stand up and read

a letter from his home organization, because i see we have 43 different home health care agencies, some that don't even have hospitals. the therapyists drive long distances. we have people here from rural states, and montana is certainly one of them. those home health care agencies know they are not even going to get paid enough from medicare to get gas in the car to drive out from the ranches and farms from the people trying to stay ow out of hospitals and -- stay out of the hospitals and nursing homes. people drive tens of thousands of miles every year all to help people stay at home and there have give them the dignity but also allow them to keep down the cost of care for everyone. >> 20 minutes and 22 seconds. >> the salary of mr. william d.

novelli, who i understand stepped down, his salary last year was over $1.5 million. mr. tauzin, he only made $1.5 million last year, and the gentleman from blue cross-blue cheeled, only $1.6 million. chicken feed. >> i would like to share with my friends on the left an entirely different bill, the bill was no child left behind. we were all for it because our president had proposed it. and my staffer said to me listening to the debate, you know, if senator clinton voted

for this, you would vote against it, because you would think it is too heavy-handed government teerns -- interference. and i said, you know, you are ride right, and i had to do what i thought was the right thing, and i voted against it. every argument we are currently hearing from the right side of the aisle would be coming with great roars and insistent statements on the other side of the aisle. but because it is their president who proposed it, they are somehow keeping their consciences under control here. i would hope they would recognize the irony in that and then at least one -- that's all we need to stop this bill -- at least one would prog recognize that conscience ought to prevail and we should stop this bill.

let us be clear, if this should stop, health care reform will not die as a cause. indeed, health care reform will be reborn in a bipartisan sense of let's solve the problem rather than an impartisan sense of let's jam something down someone's throats -- people's throats. i hope someone on that side of the aisle will let conscience prevail. >> senator mccain has pointed out where the lobbyists are on this bill. senator barasso pointed out where the people in wyoming are on this bill. we also know where the american people are. i haven't seen a survey in months by anybody that indicates the american people are for this

bill. it's not in doubt. we heard that president clinton came up to their lunch. the president may be coming back himself. you know the argument they are making on the other side? ignore the american people, make history. make history? what i hear the american people saying to us, vote for this bill, and you'll be history. this is not in the gray area. the american people are asking us to stop this bill and start over. they don't want a 2,074-page monstrosity of complexity and tax increases. they want us to stop and start over and get it right. >> could i ask the senator from new hampshire very quickly, is

it your understanding that aarp does sell health insurance and wal-mart sells health insurance? >> that is correct. >> then wouldn't they be included in the amendment for excessive remune racial -- remuneration? >> the underlying proposal is a blatant act to europeanize our economy and move us toward a system where the government would determine what we do. but the system says that both of those groups would full underneath that. there is no reason we as

congress should decide the compensation levels for people in the private sector. >> i just want to put a face on what home health care really means to the quality of health care and to lowering costs of health care in america. my youngest son was in a horrible accident in 1989. he was hospitalized for eight weeks. he had four surgeries. developed an infection. he was put in home health care after those eight weeks, and the cost was just pennies on the dollar. my wife and i administered drips so he could continue to fight off the infection. the eight weeks he was in the hospital cost over $800,000. the few weeks he was home cost only a few thousand dollars. we are taking a service that greatly improves -- reduces the cost of health care and improves

the quality of life. now granted he wasn't on medicare, but people in medicare have access and have the same type of thing happen. on the one thing you pay money to pay for someone's government-option health care, but you take away an affordable effective way to deliver health care to millions of americans. >> senator, i was thinking about last year's campaign. you were highly involved in that. i know you offered some health care solutions that were maligned, and i think back on that, and i wonder had our sitting president run a reform bill that took money out of medicare, which was insolvent, to create a new entitlement, hurt seniors through home health, eliminating choices, making sure their doctors got a 23% cut in a year, he ran on a platform of health care reform that did that, had unfunded

mandates to states, raised taxes and told the american people bhile -- while he was campaigning that their premiums were going to go up, i do wonder if the outcome would have been the same? as a matter of fact, i can't imagine a health care policy being presented that is more off -base than the one we are dwage. it raises taxes and premiums, and that's what we're discussing. why my friends on the left want to give our president a victory on that basis, is amazing to me. since you were up close and personal to that, i would ask you to respond. >> i am reluctant to take a trip down memory lane again, but could i just say that one of the phrases throughout the campaign, if you like the insurance policy you have, you can keep it.

you tell me how people who have medicare advantage can keep it under this proposal. it is impossible. maybe the other side is right. maybe these reductions have to be made in medicare advantage. maybe those changes have to be made. i don't happen to agree. although cross savings should be there. but no one can believe you should keep the same medicare advantage policy that 11 million seniors have told -- today under this proposal. it is impossible. >> senator, if i may, if the senator from arizona would allow, i would like to ask one question to my friend, the medical doctor here, about infections in hospitals. my understanding is that home health care is actually better for the patient, it is better for the effect casty -- efficasy of the treatment because in hospitals patients get

infections. isn't this proposal that is going to take people out of home health care and send them to hospitals, is it going to actually hurt patients? >> this proposal is going to hurt patients in a lot of ways. it is going to hurt patients psychologically -- they are in a hospital when they want to be home. the better place to be is at home as long as there is someone coming around to check on them. that's why for so many reasons doctors have for decades said try to help patients get home as quickly as they can. that's the best place for them to heal. we heard from the senator from georgia about pennies on the dollar, the effectiveness of this. it is good for folks. it is good for the whole health care of our nation if we have people feeling at home and not in the hospital. >> thanks to our crack staff who

are a good example of the work-release program, i would remind my friend from montana a "roll call" article from june 8. max baucus called a last-minute pre-emptive strike with a group of democratic lobbyists warning them not to attend a meeting with republicans set for thursday. baucus' chief of staff met with lobbyists, including several former baucus aides, who have made a nice transition. they said republicans are having this meeting and you need to let all your clients know if they have someone there, that will be viewed as a hostile act. this would say i am interested in working with republicans. then again, "the new york times" -- again, my favorite -- again,

taws-in -- tauzin's $5 million representative, he said if you come in first, you will have a rock-solid deal. the former republican from louisiana said "who is ever going to get in a deal with the white house again?" they cut a deal. that's, again, in answer to the senator from montana, that's probably how he got the letter, the same way tauzin got his letter. go ahead. >> we know there is a disconnect between the inside-the-beltway lobbyist and the american people who are speaking loudly to all of us in all the surveys saying,

please stop this thing. i have never had people in the past stop northeast -- me and say, please stop this bill. i'm sure there are people who are for it. i have not met one thrfment must be a doctor in kentucky who is for this. i have not heard from one. this is an incredibly unpopular bill. thus their only rallying cry, make history. ignore the american people. what an act of arrogance. what an act of total arrogance. we know better than you. why don't all you american people, all 300 million of you, just sit down, shut up, we'll do it for you. we'll restructure one-sixth of the economy. we know what is best for you. this is an act of total arrogance. as the senator from utah pointed out, we just need one democratic senator to say "no."

no, i'm not going to do this. i know the president would like me to make history, but this is wrong for the country, and i will not participate in it. just one could make a difference. >> thanks, senator. >> in october of year, "the group and its subsidiaries has collected royalties from the sale of policies, credit cards, and other products that carry the aarp name." >> that the aarp executive would naturally fall under the lincoln amendment? >> absolutely. it says the revenues they collected according to the tax records were made up from the sale of these insurance products. >> i think the senator from north carolina has made an excellent point. consistency would retire that

aarp be included in this amendment if the amendment is going to go forward. i hope the amendment doesn't pass, but surely it should be consistent with all the different interest groups. >> if i might ask unanimous consent to enter the consolidated sales of aarp. >> without objection. >> mr. president, i have enjoyed this colloquy, i have enjoyed the enthusiasm that is here, and i have noticed that the sense of passion to get something done properly for the american people is on this side of the aisle and a great deal of defensiveness is

on the other side of the aisle. we all have been caught at one time or another in the struggle between support in a leadership position or a presidential position and our own sense of what is the right thing to do. i join with my leader from kentucky in saying that the people of utah have never been more worked up about any issue than this one. i have never seen any circumstance where they have been more firm and unanimous in their demands that this bill be stopped. now, the senator from kentucky said, if there is somebody in kentucky that's for this bill, he hasn't met them. i have met some people in utah who are for this bill. they have spoken to me about it as i pass through airports or i walk down the street in the hearing of other people from utah. and as soon as anybody hears someone tell me to vote for this

bill, there is a coreous -- chor ous of voices that say, don't listen to him -- listen to us. this is a terrible bill. i have been proud to point out in utah studies show we have the best health care in the united states and if everyone got their health care there it would not only be the best, it would be one-third cheaper than the national average. i have spent a lot of time talking with people that provide that result. unanimously, they tell me, this bill would damage that result. it would damage the quality and change the result. why would we want to change that process? >> this bill is going to hurt

the future of care, it is going to hurt medicine in america. you cannot take $464 billion away from medicare, a program that the seniors of this country depend upon, and say that it won't effect their care. it will. it will effect them in the hospitals, it will erving them in the doctor's offices, it will affect them in their homes, it will affect them in the final days of their lives in the hospices. that's what i hear about across wyoming. i have not met doctors that support this. i have not met very many patients that support this. this is a bill that will be bad for our small businesses. it will be bad for people who want to get insurance. it will be bad for people who have insurance because they know their premiums are going to go up. it will be bad for people that pay taxes, but specifically with home health care, this is going

to be awful. it is going to affect small pcompluents in all of the small communities of america, not just wyoming. i can't imagine anyone in a small community being for this. >> put more people in the hospital. senator from tennessee. >> i have been listening to this gay -- debate, and it is seldom debates on the floor have this much impact on me, but i do think the lincoln amendment is a terrible amendment. i wonder if we should ask unanimous consent to change the amendment to take into act aarp and farma and others. >> and i hope that the senator

will be glad to modify her amendment to include all these other people who have gotten extremely wealthy. phrma, 8% increase in drug prices in the last year. again, i refer to "the new york times" -- how much time remains. senator, wrap it up. >> the senator from arizona over the last couple days stated this case very well, and it will continue to be stated. they are cutting medicare to fund a new government program. they are taxing the american people through drugs and devices. their own insurance policy needs more money so that government can have a larger hand in health care, and you know what? at the end of the day the american people realize now they are going to pay more and the quality of their health care is going to go down. no more obvious than the current amendment on slashing the

reimbursements to nursing homes or to hospice or any other program under medicare. i thank the gentleman. >> we will do it a lot between now and the time that the vote is forced. the american people are on our side. >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> senator from arkansas. >> well, thank you, mr. president. i am very proud to come and join in this debate on an issue i think is critical to all arkansasians -- arkansans. as we talk about health care reform, clearly our delivery system in health care is broken. we have the best doctors and research and technologies, and yet our delivery system is broken. and for the last 24 months the senate finance committee has held hearings and roundtable

summits and all kind of different delibtive -- deliberative efforts -- advocacy groups on the part of patients -- anyone that would come and say how do we make this system better for the patients, who are the ultimate recipients of this policy. so to anyone who says they are jumping in here and moving too fast -- you know, i have tremendous respect for the gentleman from kentucky. he is a good friend of senator mcconnell's. the minority leader's comment that we are saying to our

colleagues, sit down and shut up and take it, i would just like to comment to the nor -- to the senator from tennessee who said we are throwing seniors under the bus. we are here in a body of being respectful and how we solve these problems. the senator from massachusetts brings up a great point. where are the suggestions from the i'd on how we solve this. are they going to come to the table of how we doing in other than just going with the status quo? clearly americans understand that we're not throwing them under the bus. we're trying to figure out how is it we preserve medicare that's going to go bankrupt in 2017? how do we bring down the long-term costs in health care so we can preserve the programs that work and that are so

meaningful to people in their lives? i would just say as we come to this debate i hope we will consider the age 46 old -- the age-old attitude of being respectful of other people's attitudes and views and try to bring something about that will be helpful. not throwing constituents under the bus, not telling people to sit down and shut up, but actually bringing solutions. i know senator mccain was trying to call an awful lot of people in arkansas. my mother was one of those he tried to get in touch with to say that something is wrong up here. i certainly visit with my mom a lot and hear about the concerns she has about her care, and she does believe very strongly in

some of the things that she's seen in her medicare bill, inefficiencies that could be changed, ways we can make it a better program. so i hope we will all come to the table here with good ideas and ways that we really can make a difference. i notice that there was an effort or certainly a concern about wanting to add people to my amendment. i would welcome the republicans, if they would like to offer their own amendment, to include other entities. i have worked on my amendment, and i like my amendment the way it is. i think it focuses on industries whose sole purpose is to provide health insurance. their sole purpose is to provide health insurance -- no, i'm going to continue and you can take a turn on your time. our bill is to provide health

insurance for the people of this country. i would use an article that came out yesterday. it represents one of our larger national insurance companies that are working hard -- i think . at least i hope they are -- to do what is right, and they are going to be dumping 600,000 plus customers because they don't think their profits are big enough. yet i look at the record and i believe that their c.e.o. actually in 2008 made over $24 million. now if they are pay their top executive $24 million last year but they are going to complain that their profits are not big enough that they have to dump patients, i would just ask my colleagues, where do we go to correct this imbalance if it is not to a very [applause]ible amendment -- a

very plausible amendment? it doesn't restrict what companies can give their executives in pay. it does say we will not subsidize that with tax dollars. the very american taxpayers they are dumping are the ones that are subsidizing those incredible executive pay amounts. i would say to my friends over there -- i have to say, those over there that are defending the status quo on behalf of health insurance companies and executives that are receiving these multi-million dollar compensation packages -- you know, it took nine ever them at one time to be able to defend these executive compensation. otherwise nine of them wouldn't have been down here trying to shift the conversation to something else. i would think that the american people do understand that that is out of balance.

and here we are at an opportunity to provide these insurance companies even more customers. we simply want to be reassured that we are not through taxpayers' dollars subsidizing these enormous executive amounts, compensation amounts, and more importantly, that the savings that come from that are going to go into the medicare trust fund to shore it up. i appreciate everyone's debate and their efforts to come to the floor today and talk about a critical issue to folks. i just would remind again, mr. president, all of my colleagues, current law allows all businesses to deduct up to $1 million annually per executive as a business expense. that's a million dollar company that's subsidized by the taxpayer money. there is more way they can

provide greater compensation and there are lots of loopholes in there that allow them to get more tax compensation for their executives. but my proposal would limit this amount to $400,000, the very amount that the highest public official in this land gets paid, the president, $400,000 salary for those health insurance companies that will profit as a result of the health insurance reform because our objective is to get more people insured. so working diligently through all these technicalities trying to get more people insured, we are creating a new marketplace for them with more consumers, a tremendous amount. but this is only in regard to health insurance customers. it doesn't dictate what can be paid but it does limit the taxpayer compensation for the

subsidy. it is aimed at putting premium dollars toward lower rates and more affordable coverage and not into their pocketbooks. they are complaining about profits, and yet they are still paying executives a tremendous amount of money. to be sure there is evidence that these companies need help to do the right thing for consumers. where health insurance companies spent 90 cents on every dollar for health care and that number has decreased to 80 cents. for every dollar they spend only 80 cents of it goes back to provide coverage to their consumers. that is in 2007. those are the numbers we have. according to the testimony delivered to the senate commerce committee earlier this year, this trend has translated into a

difference of several billion dollars in favor of insurance company shareholders and executives at the expense of health care providers and their patients. so it is imperative that we do what we can to reverse that trend, particularly when more americans will be purchasing their health care coverage as a result of this health reform package. taxpayers are footing the bill from this, and we must make sure they do not take advantage of the american people. those defending the status quo, again, i want to point out we had a lot of senators that came to the floor this morning op the republican side to defend the status quo on behalf of the health insurance companies and their executives who receive these multi-million dollar

packages. i would just mention that the aamerican people are already footing the bill for executive pay. as we move forward it is just going to be a greater benefit to those executives and the ability for these insurance companies to be able to do that. we want to keep those insurance companies in business. we want to make sure they are there as providers, but it is a disconnect when they say they have to connect 600,000 of their insured under the current system because their profits aren't high enough and yet they are paying their top executives a $24 million compensation package that is subsidized by the taxpayers. i would just hope we will work together to determine what is the right thing to do here. if we really want to reform health care, we are asking everybody to come to the table and make an effort in putting ourselves back on track. ultimately, we want that quality of life that a new reformed

health insurance and health care providing delivery system can provide. we also want to make sure we strengthen our economy and making sure that we make good use of every medical dollar and that we're getting the biggest bang for that buck. it is a critical part of putting our economy back on track. the assumption that's been made on the other side has been based on the current and proken marketplace where insurance companies -- broken marketplace where insurance companies bully and monday op lies their -- monopolize their customers. i have a neighbor, a hard-working woman who is a single mom, and she can't get insurance because of a preexisting condition. i know of other people who had good insurance but they were

dropped. we look at this not in terms of the broken marketplace that compifts today, but of what we are trying to create, and that is a more robust marketplace, and one that makes sense both for insurance companies and for consumers as well. with insurance market reforms we plan to implement along with more consumer choices along with the exchange, these insurance companies are going to have to work to keep up with the business they have and be able to be there for future customers, and that's a healthy marketplace. i don't think i'll get any disagreement from my colleagues on the other side. competition and choice is the way to go. it is that trep neural -- entrepreneurial american spirit. so this would set the cap at the same level as the highest-paid

government official, that's the president, it is estimated to save over $650 million over 10 years and will place these savings in the medicare trust fund to further strengthen the soljens conveniencey -- solvency of that program. we know there are some programs that are over-subsidized which means those in regular medicare programs are having to pay for the outrageous sub did is -- subsidies in these other programs. we want to make sure we create a better system for everybody that's out there. that means making sure we are protecting medicare for all seniors. it means we do it in a deficit-neutral way. and it means we really work to put our best foot forward in bringing about partnerships between states and the federal

government as well as with providers who understand that this delivery system is broken as well. in closing, mr. president, the choice on this bill is very simple -- either you support these revenues or you support having the i., s. write a check -- i.r.s. write a check and having them subsidize the mulled eye -- multi-million dollar salaries they pay their people. >> our regular book tv schedule will be pre-empted during these rare senate sessions. watch the senate debate on health care on our companion network c-span 2.

the only network with the full debate unedited and commercial free. watch video on demand. go online to c-span.org/health care. >> peter hart led this discussion at the annenberg public policy center. this is about two hours. >> thank you all for being here. if you can put your name tags facing toward me, that will help me a lot. there's bill down at the end and victor. great. how are you? everybody in good shape?

thank you all very, very much for being here. let me introduce myself. my name is peter hart. i take public opinion polls, and i'm from washington, d.c. this has been an ongoing project we have done at the university of pennsylvania for almost 10 years. it is just a chance to visit with voters, find out what people are thinking or where things are at, and we thought at the end of the first year of the obama administration would be an excellent possibility to sort of drop in, see where everybody is coming from, and it also allows us to show you the annenberg center, the new building, which i think you will agree, is gorgeous. so thank you all for be -- all for coming in. i know a lot of you are from the surrounding areas. what i would like you to do is

go around the table, give me your name, and also tell me where you are from. . @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ >> i am patricia, i am a bartender. >> my name is bill, i live in bucks county, and i am retired. i work part-time as an extra in

movies and tv. >> this will be just one of your usual mix that you are doing. we appreciate you squeezing us in. thank you very much. >> i am bernadette. i am an account representative. >> i am original loss prevention manager. >> my name is wadeeah. >> my name is cheryl. i am currently a stay at home mom of a very active 21-month-

old little boy. i was laid off in july. i worked for 11 years at a sales training company and i was the office manager there. >> that is great. that we start off very quickly, give me a word or phrase to describe how things are going in america today. just to give me a sense of where in the country is today. >> uplifting. >> stagnant. >> downward. >> troubling. >> better. >> uncertain. >> stable for the moment. >> with a drawn out moment.

>> improving very slowly. >> things getting better. >> sort of a recovery. >> this is really interesting to me. i have been doing this over a period of time. this is the first time i have gotten people saying that they see glimmers of hope out here. like the ec's glimmers, and where is the hope you see? -- why do you see these glimmers. >> when obama became president, a salt the hope of change, fresh blood. i just seen him looking more towards the average working person. a see him doing a lot of work. i do not expect miracles in the first year. it is going to take some time, and i am hoping -- holding out for this to happen. that is why set up living. >> wadeeah, what is your

expression they used? >> stable for the moment. it is one thing to promise, and is not going to happen overnight. in the industry are working in, people are going back to school. depending on the industry work in, it gets better, like myself. i see it slowing up a little bit when it comes to the unemployment these. >> vic, where are you coming from in terms of all this? >> i do a lot of travel at of the country. i know our image and perception of other countries of us has improved dramatically since the beginning of obama's

administration. >> patricia, have you see things? >> it is pretty bleak on my side of the street. >> my husband is a carpenter. he gets up takes a shower, gets dressed, no work. >> john, you were pretty down in terms of where things are. >> i think the unemployment rate will continue to rise. the value of the dollar keeps going down. several attacks on capitalism and our american way. it is not a good scenario as far as business is concerned. the only areas that look good this government. that is where the spending is. >> bill, what are you thinking. >> freeman is the same. the job situation is bleak, and i do not see it improving a lot anytime soon. the administration is taking on so many things at one time,

health care, the war in afghanistan. i don't know if you would be better if they just focused on one at a time and then moved onto another. >> bills as the problem is they are focusing on so many things that would be better if maybe if they took one thing at a time. how many of you agree with bill? about half the group. bernadette, you did not raise your hand. >> i think part of the presidency is to take the current issues of the day, which is unemployment. businesses are closing. they are moving their manufacturing miss at -- facilities to asia, china, and mexico. these people worked all their lives in these positions, and

now they are gone. there is nowhere to go. >> william, what are you thinking about this situation and where we are at? >> i would say it is improving. i feel the administration has been taking on more than one thing at a time. took a a little more than eight years to get where we are. if we were to sit back and just take one issue at a time, i think that would really be stagnant. there is so much being thrown at the government and the people themselves. you have to try one thing, and that does not work, you have to tighten it up and do something else. >> pamela, you raise your hand in terms of maybe taking on too many things. >> obama is really trying. i give him that, because he is really getting in there and working to improve the situation, but it seems like there are so many things, there is so much that needs to be

improved and worked on. he is spending so much money and so much time on everything. i don't know what to do, but it is too much, too many things going on at once, i think. >> let me hear from him and cheryl. -- tim and cheryl. >> i used the word stagnant. the economic indicators are running flat. we are not seeing rate decreases are great increases in any of them. the dow has obviously tanked. there has been a slight recovery in the dow, but we are not anywhere near we were prior to the crash. unemployment is going to keep rising, i believe. every administration is going to have the same problems obama is having. it is endemic to the overall leaders. i wonder how much of what the initiation is doing -- he is aggressive.

i like that. i want aggressiveness in the u.s. president. i also want focus, and i am not seeing it. his own party, he tried to do with the health care bill that passed the house by two votes. that means he could not get enough of the democrats on his side to make it a landslide victory. we have to focus, regardless of what side we are on, to get the country back where it belongs. >> i agree that you cannot just sit and fix one problem at a time. if you work on health care, then jobs suffer. if you work on the foreign policy issues, then what we do about the issues at home? i think that as a president, it is your job to manage all these different things. these policy changes and making

thing happened just does not happen overnight. you have to have your hand and a lot of difference jars to get it all done. in my family alone, i was talking to patricia and. i was laid off, my dad was laid off. >> what did he do? >> he was an industrial hygienist. he was laid off from that job and then went to a private company and was laid off from there. my brother was laid off. my other brother, it took him nine months to find work. i guess i have a very personal connection to at least the unemployment piece of that. in some ways, a lot of these different issues are connected, i believe. i just feel you have to work on everything so everything will move forward.

>> you voted for mccain? >> i did. >> just tell me what you are thinking about america and where you were at. >> i felt that obama was not qualified. i would say i am all for obama 2016 or 2020, but for now, no. i sat back and waited to see if the administration or the cabinet makes a difference. i wanted to feel hopeful, because he is a good speech he delivered -- he is a good

speech deliverer. i don't think -- i studied economics in college and i know that the economy is a cyclical thing. i just think -- i know that these things follow trends. >> try and put yourself back to inauguration day and how you felt as president obama was taking the oath. here is where my head was that. i am going to start down here with victor and go just straight around. >> i felt extremely proud for our country. of course, i voted for obama. internationally we had taken such a beating over the last eight years.

we were in the toilet as far as our international reputation. this was a way of bringing us up to where i think our country wanted. >> the country -- proud the country was able to recover, however disappointed that i felt that obama was smoke and mirrors, just as i felt palin was smoke and mirrors. i felt that neither won broad enough to the table. >> i felt proud. of course of voted for obama and i was really excited. just like anybody, we just wanted a change, i think. it was definitely happening. >> i also was very proud that we were able to look past skin color and race and unite for a common purpose.

i just felt very helpful. >> john, you voted for mccain? >> yes. >> what did you feel on inauguration day? >> that i am going to have to live with this for four years. >> i felt very hopeful and excited for a change for the country. >> i also felt hopeful, but also a relief. we needed a change, i felt. >> i feel as though it was a breath of fresh air, like a new beginning. we needed to start over. >> patricia, did you have a feeling in general as inauguration day came? was it a downer? >> yet, it was. >> i voted for obama.

i felt cautiously optimistic. i heard the same story from many presidents. >> we are 10 months later. what are your feelings, cheryl? >> i think pretty much the same. i think is going to take more time than 10 months to release the results, like i said before. >> it is going to take time. >> in a sense, here is how i feel today about where we are at and where the president is. how would you answer that? >> i am kind of feeling that there is a very mixed bag of things he has to do right now.

he has his hands into much. >> i am still cautiously optimistic. >> bernadette? >> how do i feel about his progress so far? >> how do you feel about things today? >> i am little disappointed. i think he is kind of slow moving. and not exactly decisive. >> bill? >> i would rather have him slow moving. i would rather have congress and reading the bill that they actually vote on. it is too soon to evaluate what he has done, because he has had his hand in so many pots. tim said it best, he has to focus on one or the other to get it done. >> patricia, how are you feeling? >> i am hopeful that things turn around. >> i am hopeful that things will turn around also.

>> i have hope, but i am feeling a little fearful because there is so much she has to do. it is too overwhelming, and at this moment in time, i am a little fearful. >> would you explain this cheerfulness that you have? -- this cheerfulness that you have? >> he came out like a bolt of lightning. that is what i wanted, he seemed very intelligent and could do things now with afghanistan and the healthcare bill, i feel he is losing votes are popularity. he is losing something. i cannot come up with the words i am trying to find. >> he is losing something, meaning what, that he has sort of given up this spirit? i am trying to understand. >> what he is looking to do,

high real people are losing the interest in what he is trying to do. he is losing people as far as what is happening now, and his speech tomorrow on afghanistan, and with the health care bill. people are now getting, myself included, fearful, they can this really work? can he pull this off? in the beginning, i thought he could pull everything off, but he is only a human being. he is one man, and i feel like our country is such a wreck right now, in he is trying to evict -- trying to bring it all together. i do feel he has the intelligence, he has the education. he is a human being, though. >> pamela, you voted for obama. is lee's a close to where you are at, or do you find yourself in a different place -- it is lisa clothes to wear your hat? >> i feel he is doing a good job, considering what he took

over, and considering the mess the country was in when he took over. he has a lot of work to do, but he is slowly improving the country, although there is still a lot of unemployment and still a lot of problems. he cannot do everything overnight. >> how many would agree with what pamela just said? he is doing a good job, considering what he took over and things are slowly improving. how many would agree with pamela? let me just see the hands. sharyl, vic, william, and pam. and all of you voted for president obama last year. tell me something, how many of you believe that the next generation is going to be better off than this generation? the next generation will be better off than this generation. we have two and half hands up.

i can see the difference between this and this. [laughter] you did not raise your hand, bill, why not? >> just too many things. you are not going to solve it all in this administration, and we do not know what is to come in the next administration. i think washington politicians spend so much time attacking each other that they do less for the people. when they get elected, half of their term is planning their reelection. >> bernadette, that is a broad question. for 20 plus generations, america has always handed the baton forward and we believe that the next generation is going to build upon this generation. in most cases, we have always been able to do it. you did not raise your hand when you thought that the next generation is going to be better off.

>> i feel tax enslavement. i do not feel there is the opportunity that other generations had. where is the new frontier? we need a new frontier. we need something else to make that promise in america. >> vic, you did not raise your hand. do you have kids? >> yes i do, but they are all grown and starting their own generation. i think we are saddling our kids and grandkids with a tremendous amount of debt. that is a problem that is not in the forefront on a lot of agendas, but as we continue to turn more and more of our revenue over to just financing debt. >> i do not feel the generation

will be better off. the social security program in the next 30 or 40 years, the prices of the cost of living are going up. people are living longer due to better medical treatment and new ideas and cures. we are going to have to take care of a lot of us will soon, and i don't know that the older generation is going to have a way of doing that. >> write-down on a piece of paper what grade would you give congress this year? >> just on everything in general? >> yes, in general. anybody give them an a? one b.

how many c's? i have four c's. how many d's? how many f's? what is wrong with congress? john, let me see if i can bring you out of your show. >> if this function. they did not listen to the population. they have their own agenda. they do not respond to anybody who has a different opinion. they work on things which are not important to bring the country forward. they should be working on the economy. they worked on health care. what is the most important thing? a nation's power is economics. everything emanates from economics. if we are not a strong company -- if we are not strong country,

we will not have health care or these other things. >> they are career politicians. a lot of the ladies and gentlemen in congress, that is the job they have had since they were 26 or 27. they did not respond to the public. they are concerned -- they spend half their term worrying about how to get elected again. they do it for 820, 30, or 40 year span. bernadette, what is wrong with congress? >> they have their own self- interest. that is really what it is about. they have all these people that do all these favors for them, and they have their own little cliques going on. i think it should have a term of eight years and then you are out.

>> i think there is too much money and use them to the government in these campaigns and everything else. it totally sways their opinions and their decisions. >> is this congress any different from the previous congress? in other words, i am really mad at this congress, but i was not as mad at the previous congress, where this is just another group of congressional leaders and they are no better or worse? >> they are more arrogant. >> less responsive than the last group. >> let me do one other thing. let me hand out a little handout. take one and passed the rest down. just put your name of his top.

your first thing is done. -- first name is fine. everyone point fingers at someone. who do you feel is most at all, looking at these five? i talked about the democratic leadership. the democrats have not worked with the republicans to form a consensus because the republicans have acted as a block, saying no, but democrats and republicans. who would you circle as most responsible? >> most responsible for what? did you give them an f? if you do not think congress is doing a good job, who do you feel is at fault?

how many state democratic leadership majority? nobody. how many say b? nobody. how many say c? one. how many d? everybody else d. did anybody say e? what is your message to congress? what should they hear from you? you said democrats and republicans are equally to blame because they only play politics and worry about who will get credit or blame. >> regardless -- everybody has an agenda. if you want to make a decision for the people, the need to make those decisions for the betterment of those people the

unemployment rate is going to get higher. you have to be mindful that these are the people that get you where you need to be in life, so you need to give back to them. >> anybody else? tell me what you are saying when you areb -- when you circled b. >> they are a servant of the people who elected them to the office. >> and you don't think they are servants anymore? >> i think there self-serving. they have decided on their own enrichment. >> they care about themselves more than the people. they do not do anything for us. they are worried about their own money and their own traveling

and everything but us. >> write-down on the blue piece of paper the one thing that you can remember from the congress this year that outraged you. anything that you can remember this year that the congress did, didn't do, whatever it may be, that outraged you. who has something? raise your hand. what outraged you, patricia? >> doesn't have to be a vote that they took? >> no, it could be anything. >> nancy pelosi trading in her

757. >> somebody else, give me something that outrage to prd y. >> not giving us the november mission, held clare -- health care plan there are working on. >> i think the health care and going against obama every step of the way, to dannell. >> who else? >> health care, because what they do is use a baseball bat on all the people who do not want to vote their way. $300 million to a senator to get the vote. that is not the way you are supposed to run the congress. you are supposed to have the interest of the country first, not buying people off, and that is what they do all the time. they do it on friday night when nobody can see what they do. >> they fail to be unified on

the issues. they start out that they want to do this and try to pass that, and then they start rambling along and it turns out they are at each other's throats, not getting anything done. >> looking at health care as one issue, they are so partisan. they could care less about the country. the effects of what they do, they do not care. they are not going to be around in 30 or 40 years. who knows the truth about whether this health care is going to be effective or not? what is the truth? what is the best for the country? don't pull a piece of the deal and say this is the recent you vote or do not vote for this. we want the facts, and they will not give it to us.

>> i had a variation of what john mentioned. the specific instance was the city isn't -- the center from louisiana -- senator from louisiana who put the boat up for sale. they were doing the vote to close the debate on health care bill. she was the 16th boat that was required for that, -- 16th -- she was the 60th vote, and she got several hundred million dollars directed to louisiana just for her vote. >> write down one other thing on your blue piece of paper. when you think of congress, is there a space that comes to mind? -- is there a case that comes to mind? if i were to say if you think of the philadelphia phillies or the eagles, who is the view of the

person that you think of? is there anybody that comes to mind? just write it down on your piece of paper. bill? >> that is hard. my first instinct was to put sagatan. >> soap to people wrote down satan. [laughter] >> that is fascinating. i would not have guessed satan would have been a major name.

>> there was the really a face per se. i am embarrassed to say this, but i wrote stodgy old white dude. >> ok, good. >> pelosi and reid, dumb and dumber. >> how many had pelosi? how many had reid? so pelosi, reid, and a staunch yield white dude. >> ted kennedy. >> very interesting. that is great. what is the one thing you would like to see congress do before

they go home on recess at the end of the year? anything you would like to see them do or accomplish? >> pass a health care bill. >> let me see the hands. i have six. 61 him to pass the health care bill. anything else? >> work on the economy. >> let me turn and do something quickly here. i am going to read you a number of peoples names that you probably know and have some sort of attitude about, and get you to just essentially give me a word or phrase to describe your

feelings about each of these people. i don't want to just tell me they are a senator are just describe their title. anything that you feel about that person, so if i were to say madonna, you would say -- >> trashy. >> rock star. [applause] [laughter] >> garrido. barack obama, word or phrase. >> doing a good job.

>> give me a feeling about him. >> handsome. >> intelligent. >> trying. >> showman. >> reserved. >> inspirational. >> inexperienced. >> eloquent. >> strategic. >> nice guy. >> compassionate. >> hillary clinton, a word or phrase. >> whack job. >> hard to say. i cannot even think of a word

for her. >> presidential material. >> strong. >> bogus. -- focused. >> i think she is knowledgeable. >> intelligent. >> overbearing. overrated. >> john mccain. >> which she washy. . wishy-washy. >> hero. >> too old. >> honest. >> i would say nice. >> season. >> mitch mcconnell.

how many people say i know who he is? one person. >> he is not a leader. >> joe biden. >> i find all vice-president just to be puppets. >> shy. >> needs to go to charm school. >> a train writrider. >> adviser. >> open now, insert foot. >> what does he do?

>> nancy pelosi, a word or phrase. >> abrasive. >> very abrasive. >> egomaniac. >> polarizing. >> arrogant. >> i do not find her terribly offensive. >> i think she is a strong woman. >> queen bee. >> very aggressive. >> harry reid, how many people know harry reid? we have seven.

>> wheeler dealer. >> politician. sarah palin. . whack job. >> cannot handle leadership. >> future leader. >> immature. >> imager. >> ridiculous. >> at joke. >> crazy. >> attractive. [laughter] michelle obama. >> admirable. >> i love her. >> first lady.

>> that is the position. give me a feeling. >> strong character. >> poised. >> i would say poised, too. >> she takes a good picture. >> a very strong woman. >> inspirational. >> refined. >> indifferent. >> within the republican party, is there a person that you respect and admire? >> mitt romney. >> anybody else? >> i would go with either mitt or alan keyes. >> i like john mccain. >> a la john mccain, too. >> anybody else among the obama

voters who have somebody you admire on the republican side of the aisle? nobody? i think have to move on from there. just one other thing. i am fascinated with the michelle obama set of feelings that came out. they seem pretty hard felt. what is it about michelle obama that you like or admire? >> first of all, i feel i can relate to her. i am a mom and i have two kids. to me she seems like a genuine person.

she is intelligent, well- educated, well spoken. i think she puts her family first, which i've admired. i know it is hard to get caught up in the whole washington white house, but i feel stupid family purse. >> i agree with what sherrill said, very genuine. she does not forget the average, hard-working person. extremely intelligent. >> she reminds me a lot of jackie kennedy. >> does anybody else feel she reminds you of jackie kennedy? let me see the hands. more than half the group say she reminds you of jackie kennedy. and why? >> she is very refined, poised,

eloquent, gracious. >> she just seems to carry off her position in the white house with grace and poise. she just seems to always have herself together. she does not seem to be flustered at anything. >> except the encounter in france, when they were supposed to kiss the cheek of the president of the country. she seemed a little standoffish. that is not exactly what you are supposed to do. when in rome, you are supposed to do with the romans do. >> i thought everybody summed it up really good. genuine, poised.

>> that mego from here -- let me go from here and ask you about the major issues of the day. i will pass out this handout. i have about nine or 10 issues here. put your name on the talktop and passed it down. basically, what i would like you to do is circled the two issues that you feel are the single most important, from your point of view. i know all the seem important, but which one or two seem the most important, as far as you are concerned.

is everybody done? john, tell me one of your circles. >> unemployment. >> how many put down unemployment, economic recession as your one or two? nine of 11 people dead. what did you write down in addition -- 9 of 11 people did. patricia, what did you have? >> mortgages and housing. william? >> health care. how many had health care as number two?

who else has got something? >> i have social issues. >> i have the war's end of iraq and afghanistan. >> does anybody else have that? four people had that. or missing anything? >> i said budget and taxes. >> we have three people on that. those are the principal issues that people selected. >> talk to me about the economy for a moment. i can start with cheryl, where everybody in your family has been decimated by the economy. how many others around this table have been directly affected in a real way, in some

way where you say it has had a real effect on my life, my family's life, etc.? we have seven. john, the effect the economy has had on you. >> the effect on my business, because my clients cannot pay their bills. i clients are small business people, and they are crushed with the taxes, and they are crushed with the economy. >> pamela? >> i am a temporary office worker. i get jobs when i get jobs, and i have not been getting many lately. i had a job where the office closed down. it was an office job, and it was a good job, and it closed down. so i am getting unemployment from that. >> is anybody else getting unemployment? a couple of people are.

lisa? >> a lot of people around me have been affected. i have been fortunate. i have been working throughout this recession. >> it has not had any effect on you and changed your life style at all? >> no. >> william? >> yes, the economy is slowing down and money is not there. the business i do has totally slowdown. from working full-time to working part-time. >> patricia? >> my husband does not work. he can still make repairs and things that are necessary, but people are not building additions and kitchens and baths and things like that. i think eventually that will turn around, because you will not be able to get a mortgage to

go somewhere else. you'll have to fix what you have. there was one posting for a carpenter. >> and you are a bartender? >> there is a huge amount of credit card sales. a work at a place where a lot of people pay with credit cards because they cannot afford to work at sporting events and things like that. nzzpeople cannot afford to be there, so they are putting it on credit cards, but that catches up with you later. my tips are way down. >> do you have kids? >> yes. >> has it affected your family? >> my family is facing homelessness right now, which i never imagined could ever

happen. i am sorry. >> we are with you. >> you are retired. >> mine was an early retirement. i was in the automotive business for 30 something years. >> what did you do in the auto business? >> i was in charge of shipping and receiving for one of the major suppliers of the big three in philadelphia. due to the downsizing, and jobs going offshore to foreign countries, they have just about full deployment on the entire company. the only plants that are open are in canada and mexico now. detroit is a ghost town. i was fortunate enough to have

enough time into taken early retirement, which was beneficial to me. i am social security age now so i have social security coming in. my wife has a job in pharmaceuticals. they do not seem like they will ever go out of business. we have had to make a lot of changes. when i was working full-time, we were making better money between the two of us. we had to scale back on a few things. we keep the cars a few years longer. we do not take as many vacations. i have not had a vacation and a couple of years. >> bernadette, tell me about any affect. >> the businesses -- cars are not good together by just one maker. all the components that go into the car are made elsewhere of by

people who are specialized in that particular component. once that goes down, everything goes down. everything that goes into it. other businesses related to it, plastics, rubber. >> fortunately, i am unaffected. >> nothing really substantial. i owned a second business, a dj business, so i spent a lot of time in bars. i can see the direct economy, how often i am hearing that people are in their drinking it away because they lost their job, they lost their home, or this or that. that is one of the few places where people are generally 100% on s, when they start drinking. the reality of the situation comes out.

in of all -- in a bar, you can hear the personal effects on people. >> i am pretty stable. my father owned a restaurant and he had to close it. >> how recently? >> back in march. >> he had to close because -- >> he still had to make the lease, and my parents had a mortgage and cars. taxes and things of that sort. he was a car salesman for 20 years, so he went back to doing that. that is still slow. your credit score has to be 720

to get a freaking hyundai. he is older now so he is a little more relaxed. >> i am really concerned about my dad. it has been almost 14 months since he got laid off. he will be 69 this month. you can hire someone who is 25 or 30 to work for less. he is a very specialized position, not your run-of-the- mill engineer. that is a strike against him, and his age as a strike against him. i am worried what is going to happen when his unemployment runs out. if he does not find a job -- my mom works, but is not enough to keep everything going. they bought a house a couple of

years ago, a month before he got laid off, he went out and bought his first new car ever. i am the oldest of five kids. here he was with a great job and everything was going well. he goes out and gets a new car, and a month later he gets laid off. they can come and live with me, but i do not want them to have to livlose their house. my brother got laid off last january. he does odd jobs and has been able -- he works with a clientele that have not been impacted the way that some other people have. he has been able to keep that going and do some side work only collects unemployment. >> these are real and tough stories as you go around. you can feel it in every case.

what do you expect from barack obama and the obama administration? you hear your stories and these are really big human problems, and not just something that is a glancing blow, or something that is slightly inconvenient. talk to me. what do you expect from the obama administration? is there anything they can do? do you feel that the president understands your plight and what you are going through? >> i think he does. i think he really does, and i think he is very realistic as far as the plight of this

country. i do not think he is oblivious to it. i think he knows exactly what is going on, and he is trying to work hard to make it happen. >> i think where he came from has everything to do with it. >> he is the common man, and he came from a single-parent home and they struggle. i think he can relate more so than some of the other presidents who did not have those same concerns growing up. their families were a little more well-off. >> how about the sense of what they should do? it is one thing to say he can relate, but is he making anything happen? patricia, as you see it, unless the economy gets moving, your husband is just not going to -- if there is one job for a carpenter and 100 people trying fort, the chances of his landing

work, and even if he does, there are 99 others who are not. do you have a sense of what he should be doing or what your looking for? . . . >> there is a lot of high-level profit-taking and we are paying the price for that. i do not have an answer. >> does anybody have a sense, here is what i think he should be doing, this is where he should be going? >> he needs to create an environment that is positive in the economy so people will invest money in businesses to create jobs. he is not doing that. . . .

overseas. he doesn't make laws. it's congress that has to be. >> what about all the spending? from what i've read -- >> these districts don't even exist. >> a lot of that money went into districts that don't even

exist. >> who approved it? >> congress. >> that's what it comes down to. i think he needs to push more bipartisan. >> he's a leader. he's inspirational. he should get people to line up and get him to do. ok. feeling good about something is a hell of a lot different than getting something done. i can feel good and i can relate for you, but if you don't do anything for me -- >> you're exactly right. i hold the congress responsible. i don't hold barack obama responsible. and how many new faces do we have in congress? i don't know. how many new faces do we have as of this election? >> time-out. i got a question -- tim stated, he says, i don't blame barack obama. i blame the congress. how many agree with what tim's statement is when it comes to unemployment, the economic

circumstances and the things you've been talking about? how many of you agree with tim? good, tim, i'm glad you agree with yourself. >> four, five, six, seven, eight. ok. most people do agree with that. but at the end of the day, people are going to vote up or down on the basis of jobs and economy and where the things are at. here's the president of the united states, is there anything that you want to say to him or you feel that he should do? this is your shot, lisa. >> yop exactly what it is -- i just -- i mean, i just feel -- i wish there was something he can do because it seems like it's getting separated. it's like the average person and then a lot of rich people. it's getting really deep. rich people -- there's no middle-class anymore. >> it's rich or poor.

>> i wish he could do something to focus on the average person -- so we don't lose businesses, you know the restaurants, small businesses. i wish i could write him a letter. i can't think in my mind right now what exactly i want him to do. i have a lot of hope because of his leadership, his intelligence to come up with something. why is there a gap? that gap needs to be closed. >> pamela, anything? >> i agree with her on that. it seems like all the spending, all the rich people don't pay taxes. they get away with it. the congress, politicians, so many of them don't pay taxes. and we pay taxes all the middle-class are -- >> ok. one other thing, write down on your green sheet of paper, who makes your blood boil when it comes to the economy. who makes your blood boil?

who infuriates you when it comes to the economy? >> what did you write down? >> bush. >> what? >> anybody else write down bush. >> i got three people who wrote down bush. >> ok. what did you write down, pamela? >> just the rich politicians in general. >> anybody else write down the rich politicians? >> ok. what did you write down, bill? >> i wrote down a.i.g. >> how many wrote down a.i.g.? >> the c.e.o.s of a.i.g. so we've got five people. why does a.i.g. make your blood boil? >> they were the problem in the meltdown. and the administration is throwing money at the same team

that caused the problem. >> they're getting bonuses. big bonuses in this recession. it's unheard of. >> you wrote down a.i.g.? >> i wrote down corporations and a.i.g. being the same type of think. now the bonuses what i understood is that they were already written into the contract, so they had to pay those bonuses, but we did mott have to bail them out. we don't have to bail them out. we don't have to help these people out. they can fall on their face. >> yeah, i think the other element too is, you know, we had all that. and as best i can tell, is there's still no financial regulation of those big corporations. you know, i don't think any bill has passed congress that would prevent us from having exactly the same problem that we had before. >> good.

anything else? >> add on to that, we focus on health care. >> what? >> and add on to what he said, we focus on health care. they can keep eating. keep eating. we're going to bail them out. >> ok. let me go to health care because you insisted that i be there. patricia did you want to say something? >> well, when you talk about health care, bluecross, they're a huge for profit organization. i used to have insurance. one year it went up 25%. but every year they would turn a profit. but the health care reform, they have to be careful that it's not going to be a big company abusing the system. you know, it's -- >> i want to take two subjects fairly quickly. first being health care. does anybody -- tell me what

you want. congress has been debating this, discussing this, figuring this out for most of this year. what do you want? >> lower cost. >> lower cost. >> ok. what do you want? >> i want to pay the same amount. i don't care if you're rich, poor, or middle, i want everybody the same access to health care. >> so it's access or both? >> both. >> same with her. yeah. >> i want everyone to have -- every single person in this country to have -- >> how many of you agree. i want every sing mle -- single person to have health care coverage. most everybody around the table. what else do you want? >> the insurance industry out of the health care business. they're the problem. >> ok. >> their just the middleman.

>> what else? bility. >> anything else? >> improved quality. other countries have much better health care delivery systems that we do, yet we're spenting more than any other country. >> here's what i'm willing to give up in order to get this. in other words, it's very nice to say, bring in the tooth fairy and bring all of this stuff to me. are you willing to give up anything within the health care system or to do something differently? >> twice taxes help pay for health care. >> ok. ok. what else? are you winning to give up anything? >> end of life care. i mean, not as extensive as it is now. we have people in their 90's on all kinds of artificial -- >> ok. ok. >> i want to say, the same

thing with what victor said. god forbid something happens to me where i'm life support. pull the plug. i don't want to take up that money. i'm willing to give that up. >> i would say living lawsuits. definitely living lawsuits that would hopefully reduce the premiums on health care or the service care. >> ok. ok. >> higher co-pays. >> it doesn't pass. first of all. how many people say i want a health care legislation to pass , i can't describe it exactly, but you know sort of the broad elements that are in there? how many people in this room say, your choice is, we stay with the current system or we

pass some legislation, which will change health care coverage and the way the health care system works? how many say, i want a health care bill to pass? >> i got one. i got two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. no tim because -- >> i got three kids. i've got a wife who's had surgeries. i've not had to put out that much. i've always been insurance. it's never been that big a burden. >> what i know about it, i don't like it. taxes all go up. coverage will not improve. anything the government handles, they don't do well. >> patricia, why do you want it? >> i would like to have health insurance. i know there are a lot of dimensions -- you know, i have a cousin who's a chiropractor who says he's going to get paid

less. doctors, you know -- there's a lot of dimensions that need to be considered. it's not something that they need to just -- >> do you currently have health insurance? >> no. >> your family. so it's you, your husband, and nibbles? >> my son. he has the state insurance. >> the two of you have no insurance? >> right. >> anybody else does not have insurance at this table? because? >> because i was laid off. initially i was on my husband's policy. and then they changed providers and the cost for me -- for him and the children it's very reasonable. just to add me to the mix is $500 a month. and we just can't afford it. >> oh, my god. >> so most everybody -- and if it doesn't pass who's to blame? who's to blame? we end up and next year or the end of next year, you have no

health care bill, nothing's been passed into law. the situation and everything. who's to blame? >> congress. >> how many say congress is to blame? >> ok. anybody blame obama? anybody blame the special interest? >> two would agree. >> two of you agree. ok. so this is straight on congress' plate. would you blame the democrats or the republicans or both equally? >> both. >> how many say both equally? ok. good. ok. let me move to the next thing. >> can i say one more thing about health care? >> yes. >> i think hillary took it on in 19 -- yeah, i think she took it on she was going to reform it. yeah, so -- >> i don't know if anybody saw the flowchart on the health care system that they're proposing --

>> this is 1993, 1994 -- >> no. no. right now. it's quite complicated. i don't know why everything the government does has to be so ridiculous. >> ok. let me turn. was that a sarcastic remark? >> absolutely not. >> i picked up that knew answer. -- nuans. >> tomorrow night, the president is going to speak about afghanistan. by the time people look at this, those people who will be watching this, it will already be a policy. in general, what would you tell the president -- what do you want him to do in terms of afghanistan? if you say, i don't have any opinion or any idea that's fine . lisa? >> i don't want a war tax.

>> ok. >> i want him to let us know what his goals are in afghanistan. >> ok. ok. >> i want him to withdraw. i don't want him to lose any more american lives. >> ok. >> stand up if you want him to withdraw? -- withdraw. stand up. >> all right. ok. but i've got -- six people who say, i want him to withdraw. >> you're a john mccain voter, and you're a republican? >> yes. >> why do you want him to withdraw? >> primarily because -- >> you've been standing -- >> because they've been looking at this since march. they've been studying it. they changed the command in afghanistan. afghanistan is a corrupt government. the pakistanis have helped a lot.

they haven't helped enough. obama seems to be torn on which way he wants to go. he's half-hearted on running the war. so why lose anymore guys? just take them home. >> ok. pamela? >> i want them out of there. it's turning too much into vietnam. and that was a disaster. and i think we're just losing too many of our guys and for what? >> also, we're losing too many of our guys. also we're going to bring all -- or might bring all these soldiers. it's afghanistan. and they're not even sure that the afghanistan people can handle. they're so far behind to be able to handle their own country. i see us being there for a long time. and that scares me. >> ok. who else said i want them to withdraw? >> why, bill? >> i guess we didn't learn anything from vietnam. what purpose did vietnam serve? and what purpose is afghanistan

going to serve? >> the british government said, what are you going to do? get bin laden? >> i don't see the connection between terrorism and homeland security. allegedly that's one of the reasons we're in there. >> what could the president do, because if he comes out on tuesday evening and he says, we are going to bring 30,000 or 35,000 more troops into afghanistan. here is the goals, the objectives. and here is -- and withdraw strategy. how many of you would say, ok? i'll go along with his -- his point of view? >> cheryl will. patricia will. but vic, you won't go along? >> i want to see him make the

case. why is this so important in terms of american lives and trillions of dollars we've spent on -- >> bill? >> i want to watch him with interest too because if he did decide to pull out, they would call him unpatriotic. as i said, what did we learn from vietnam? what are the goals there as far as afghanistan? strastiegically they have no use for -- strategically there's no use for us at all. >> did anybody here serve in the military? >> you served in the military? >> during what time? >> vietnam veteran, 1966, 1967. >> same era but fortunately, it wasn't in vietnam. >> so you look at this and you can't see the purpose, the direction? >> no. >> do you think he can persuade you? >> persuade me to keep the troops there? >> not only keep but add to.

>> be a very hard sell. i mean, they're in iraq. get them out of iraq. why are we there? they're probably going to move -- and these -- the troops today had it a lot harder than we had it. back thens there were hundreds of thousands of men there. these men are doing, two or three tours of duties. and it's just a disgrace. >> i think we're there. i think we need to be there. if anything we're de stabilizing al-qaeda. we've eliminated the taliban. from what i've heard in the news, their attacks are stepping up again. they seem to be on the rise again. we need an american presence somewhere in the middle east. obviously, we have quite an american presence in iraq. which i agree with bill, we need to get out of iraq at this point. but until we get osama bin laden, i don't believe we need

to leave afghanistan. and we need to put pressure on pakistan. that's where he's at. >> this was a war that was handed to the president. it was a war that was handed to the country. and for him to just -- as they were saying for him to get out now, i mean, just back up, that's not the intelligent thing to do i'm quite sure he wants to go and we need to go. but you can't turn the tail until the election runs out. because we have to continue to try to make this thing work. i mean, he's going to need more troops to do that. don't send a lot of troops in. but your guys are already there. you can't leave them hanging. >> what's the purpose? >> well, the purpose is that -- as i said in the beginning, it was a war that was handed to him. so he's going to have to try -- what i'm saying is we're going to have to try to work it out the best he can. apparently, it's not getting any better. so he has to do what he can.

>> pamela, you're an independent, right? >> yes. and you voted for obama in 2008. makes the decision to ratchet up our involvement in afghanistan. does he lose your support? >> i don't like that idea. not lose my support all together. but it just kind of makes me mad because -- where does it end? you know it just seems like it's going to continue on and on and on and to what end are we going for? ok. anybody else? otherwise, i want to move on. excellent discussion. finish this sentence -- the best thing about barack obama is -- the best thing about barack

obama is -- >> i think his optimism. >> best thing about barack obama is? >> his determination. >> best thing about barack obama is? >> the face he's put forth to the rest of the world that america is more -- is more controlled. >> vick? >> his inclusiveness and his approach to government. >> ber na zphet >> well, i guess >> bernadette? >> well, i guess i would agree, he's putting a more kinder, gentler face on america. >> bill? >> he seems sincere on what he wants to do. >> uh-huh. patricia? >> been thinking. >> what? >> i've been thinking. >> best thing about barack

obama is? >> he's charismatic? >> and that he's intelligent and that he's trying to do what's best for the country. >> lisa? >> his youth and his determination. >> pam lal? >> his family values -- pamela? >> his family values. >> he'll be a one-term president. >> ok. >> are you a republican? >> not -- >> ok. >> turn it around and i'll give you the first shot, john. and that is the thing that makes me most uncertain about barack obama is -- >> his leadership skills. >> pamela? >> the war, i guess -- afghanistan problems. i'm not sure. >> ok. >> his military knowledge. >> there's nothing about him

that makes me feel uncertain about what he's doing. >> lack of qualifications for the position. >> and just let me follow up on that. is there anything that you feel in the first 10 months the way in which he's handled the job has shown his lack of qualifications? >> well, he's good of making public appearances and meeting with leaders, but i don't know that anything is actually getting done -- >> let me throw the question right back at you. is there anything that he's done which underscores from your point of view the lack of his qualify cases -- qualifications? >> i think his opinion or vacillating i would say. >> ok. bill? >> maybe just his priorities. >> ok. and when you say his

priorities, what are you trying to say? >> well, we've got two wars going on and people dying over there. i think that's a priority over health care and anything else, even the economy. we should focus on that and let's do something. >> bernadette, the thing that makes you most uncertain about barack obama? >> who did he hug, chavez at the summit. and then i'm kind of like -- wait a minute. aren't we supposed to be playing a little stancher than that. >> ok. good. do you think he's tough enough with adversaries? >> i think he needs to be a little bit more -- draw a line. stick to the line. that, you know -- >> patricia? >> i don't like the way he bowed to the chinese president. >> naive. anybody else say he's naive?

a little bit naive. i got three naives. four jacks, three naives. >> vick? >> i'd say his lack of experience, you know, particularly in the international -- i'm not concerned about the -- you know, the bows and the hugs, but you know, i do think that maybe -- did he just get chewed up and spit out in this last international tour? i guess it's a question mark at this point. >> ok. >> tim? >> i'm going to go with what patricia said, i would say lack of qualifications. i remember initially in the administration, houp of his attempted appointments were pulling out, they weren't properly vetted. something that basic, he should have advisors to vet people before they would put into place. >> the only thing i'm concerned

about is the fact that he's not going to get the support that  he needs from like congress and you know people of that sort or whatever. you know for the things that he wants for this country. >> and cheryl? >> i'm just my concern at this point are not more about him, just with everything that was handed to him, is he going to be able to really handle it all? >> ok. >> is it going to be too overwhelming for him? >> ok. great. >> interesting insight. what's most surprised you about -- about president obama? either pluses or minuses, anything? >> ha's most surprised you -- said, ok, i knew we were getting a president. and patricia said, gee, i'm not sure he's qualified. but here's what surprised me. what's most surprised you? anybody?

>> i guess what has surprised me is his -- the ambitious agenda he set for himself. i kind of expected himself to be a little cautious and trade slowly. but instead he took on a whole slew of problems that in my mind needed to be taken on. and i don't think it indicates lack of focus, but obviously, to a number of people, it does. but that's the one thing that surprised me. i didn't expect him to be as ambitious. >> anything surprise you? >> yeah, he campaigned on the blat -- platform to change. i haven't seen any difference from the past administration and this administration, really there,'s no conference. >> he campaigned on a platform of change and i haven't seen change. hands up if you agree with that? i got three people. everybody else does not agree

with that. ok. interesting. what else? surprise? >> how quickly he's turning gray. >> and does that -- and what does that tell you? >> he's working hard. he's worrying a lot about everything. he's -- >> ok. yes? >> he really wants to, you know, help the average person. i see a sincerity in him. >> how many agree? he wants to help the average person? >> ok, most obama people agree with that. >> what else? surprised you? >> he's willing to address the issues, you know, the fact that maybe he cannot take care of all of the issues -- he's willing to at least talk about it. and say, well, this is what we're going to do or this is what we need to do or this is

what we should try to do. >> one of the things that fascinated me, we did one of these sessions in july, and one of the things that i sort of got back from people, i think more an admiring wathan a detrimental way was the pace of the administration, how much they were trying to take on. what's the feeling? i mean what people always talk about is, one, the ability to take on a lot and to be aggressive. and the other side is lack of focus. does anybody here feel that he's taken on too much or has lacked focus or -- or do you give him plaw dense for taking on a lot and being aggressive? >> the second one. >> ok. >> i give him credit for taking on a lot. i don't give him credit for being able to do anything. >> ok. >> that's measurable. >> everybody can feel good about it. but the bottom line is, unemployment's hire.

the value of the dollar is lower. >> yep. >> ok. we haven't solved any real problems and we're still in two wars. >> we haven't solved any real problems. gitmo, two wars, unemployment's higher. how many agree? >> almost everybody around this table, 9-11 people agree that we really haven't solved any problems. does he still have your support, pamela, when he hasn't solved any of these problems? >> yes, because it's only been 10 months. it's going to take time. he can't solve them over night. it's got to take some time. he is trying. >> bernadette, you voted for mccain -- >> yes. has he done anything that has impressed you where you're saying, yeah, i think more of him? >> john mccain? >> no, barack obama.

tomorrow, we're doing john mccain. >> anything that's impressed me? >> no, i can't have anything come to mind. >> you know, patricia, you're an independent, right? independent republicans? >> right. anything that he's done that make you feel more favorable you voted for mccain? >> not really. >> and tim, i think it's fascinating because in many cases, you've stood up very stanchly on the republican side of things. but a lot of times you've been very complimentary of the president. tell me what you're thinking. >> well, it's a tough job. you don't run for it, if you don't want it. and when you get there, you've got a lot to do. anybody who

gets to that office, i've got to give credit to. >> crazy. >> you're crazy, i guess. but you put yourself in a position where there's going to be a lot asked of you in the position i'm in, i'm obviously, not the president. . but i run 300 retail stores. it's pressure. so guess what? you know, i can understand how it's tough to lead. it's not an easy thing to do. but i'm also not necessarily going to stand there and give him kudos on things that i haven't seen. you know, john made a real good point earlier. he said a lot of things -- we're still in the war, we're in the gitmo situation. things, like i said earlier, haven't changed. >> taken over general motors and chrysler, that's a real good move. >> not only that giving the same rights as an american citizen, as all of us we gave

the same rights to these people in gitmo. they're going to have a trail just like all of us. and guess what, they were trying to attack us. and that was obama's specific decision. >> and is that a hot button with you? >> oh, yeah. that drives me -- that about obama drives me nuts. guys are fighting in their countries trying to help their people, afghanistan and iraq, you know, have a better life, and these guys potentially, obviously, they're accused -- potentially wanted to harm our nation. and we're giving them the same rights as every single one of us in this table. that's sick. that's sick. >> anybody else feel the same way about the rights that were given to the prisoners in guantanamo. >> it's despicable. >> despicable says john. >> what's the difference? they would have the same fleppings a military court.

you know what i mean? >> anybody else have strong feelings on this? tim and john both do. does anybody else join them in terms of strong feelings? >> ok. i'll move on. and what's -- what's your one sort of memory? write it down, in fact. you can write it on the green sheet. here's the one thing is my image of president obama. in other words, some place, some visual that you see of the president. i mean if it had been the bush administration, some people would have said with the bull horn 9/11 or with the aircraft carrier, mission accomplished. everybody would have a different vision or maybe

katrina. what's the image that's in your mind? >> ok. patricia? >> the only image i think the picture of him delivering a speech. he's really good at it. i think he's like an actor. i think he's really good at delivering a speech. >> i'm looking for that visual image where i can say, oh, yes, i see it. and i could flash it up on the screen. i could see from patricia, yeah, a speech. and i see him at a podium. do you have any sort of visual image where you say, that's what captures me?

>> like i say, it's just the hope -- it's just when you look at him, he has a hope. he's bright-eyed. he's open to trying to make this thing happen. >> visual image? >> family man. picture of his wife and kids. >> yeah, i agree with that. but also i like the way he salutes when he gets off of his airplane. i think that's so -- >> anybody else agree? the way he salutes? >> ok. that's good. john? >> talking head. >> ok. >> on the night of the election, just the image of him and his wife and kids walking on to that stage, it was clear that he was going to win. >> anything since he's become president? >> i would say probably the --

at the podium. i think he's a great speech -- >> at the podium -- excuse me, on the inauguration day just taking his oath. >> tim? >> the inaugural ball, just him and his wife dancing. >> vick? >> pick a basketball. like a regular guy. >> bernadette? >> it would have to be the -- his acceptance of the presidency. but since then he hasn't done anything to make me feel connected. >> i think the vision of the crowds when he got elected -- the look of hope that everybody had. i'm not so sure they still have that look now but -- >> yeah, has the hope disappeared? >> it's fizzled. >> it's fizzled says bernadette. >> anybody else says the hope's

disappeared? >> the excitement is totally gone. >> the excitement's gone? >> just a regular president. >> what? >> just a regular president? >> i think everybody was extremely hopeful the first black man to become president of the united states. it was like historic. and everybody's like, oh, my god, this is really going to make a change. and it's kind of -- it's kind offalen out from underneath. you know what i mean? it's just not, it's not there. >> i think everybody's expected too much too soon too. >> i lot of people aren't realistic about things. everybody wants things tomorrow. everybody wants their degree yesterday. it's not going to happen. i think as the president that he's very realistic, he doesn't tease us in sing. you're going to get this. you're going to get that. he tells us, it's going to take some time. because nothing happens just

like that. it took eight years for us to get here. what makes you think it's going to happen in 10 months? >> if he doesn't get a second term that realistically, this first term is pointless. it's not going to take four years to get out of this. i'm sorry. >> not. i agree. >> i don't think people -- >> five years for it to turn around. he'll be gone. >> people don't want miracles. they want a time frame says bernadette. >> too the society that we live in, we text, we tweet, we're the instant gratification nation. you can't snap your fingers and make these problems go away. and i think -- i think what tim said is the excitement is gone. but i don't think the hope has gone yet. >> ok. the excitement's gone but the hope's not gone. how many will agree with cheryl? the excitement's gone but the

hope's not gone? >> i want to see the hands. i got cheryl. i got wadia. i got vick. i've got bernadette. i've got bill, william, lisa and pamela. sol 9-11 are saying excitement may be gone but the hope's not gone. and why isn't the hope gone? >> too soon. >> be positive about it. >> ask us next year. >> in two years. >> which leads me to a couple of final questions -- gee, you've done a great job. really it's been a fascinating discussion. and marvelously done. thank you. tell me something. just on the basis of what you're thinking -- are we looking at a great president, an average president or a poor president? you have to project out from

here, looking ahead, you know, obviously, no matter where you might stand on the political spectrum, people would say well franklin roosevelt had a tough hand. but they probably agree at the end of the day. he was a great president. ronald reagan was handed a difficult hand. and people would say he was a great president. do you see -- do you see barack obama as being a great president, an average president, or a poor president? let's go around. john? >> poor. >> ok. >> average. >> great. >> great. >> average. >> well, like every other president, only history can determine that. >> i know. i recognize that, but you're just -- you're projecting out on the basis of what you've

seen -- >> average -- >> no, but i mean, you're projecting, you know, how -- what? he'll be an average president. >> i would have to say average. average. >> great, i hope. >> ok. >> average. >> great. >> i'd say great. >> ok. >> and the reason the people who say he's going to be a great president, why? >> he's trying. >> what? >> he's trying. >> he's not sitting down. he's putting his blood, sweat and tears into everything. he's not being arrogant about it. he knows what need to happen to make it happen. >> i know he can relate to the average joe more so than past presidents could. i think that gives him a different perspective on these issues. >> victor?

>> i think part of it will be due to the fact that he didn't have a tough act to follow. i think in time will be a stark contrast between the bush administration and -- >> average president, tim, because? >> i don't see anything changing. i don't see this great -- i see a great speaker. i see a very charismatic person. but i don't see where he's going to be all that great and in changing this country. i don't. >> bill, same question. >> it's going to depend on how much he gets accomplished. and i don't see him moving from good or average to great. because the other part is going to make sure he doesn't reach greatness. >> and two other things that i'm interested in before we call it a day. write this down. when you think of his backbone

of this president, what's it comprised of? what is his backbone comprised of as you see him? >> i'm going to start with bill and we'll go straight around. >> probably his roots. >> yeah. can you give me a subs stance? >> as far -- his roots where he came from and -- >> what do you got for me bernadette? >> i've got putty because i think he goes with the flow. >> what do you have for me vick? >> maybe i misunderstood the question, but i thought what

was going to be almost legacy. >> i'm actually thinking his backbone, ok, versus a legacy or anything else. just what's there in his spine, ok, what's it made of? ok. do you have it? or i'll come back around? >> i think he's tough. >> and so his backbone is made of -- iron. >> ok. that's fine. great. tim? >> i would say his backbone is made of desire. it's pretty remarkable to have served one term and become president. >> wadia? >> his strong will to succeed. >> ok. cheryl? >> his determination and the willingness to do what needs to be done. >> john? >> plastic. >> plastic. >> ok. good. pamela? >> his willingness to try to change. >> ok. lisa? diamond. hardest material. >> william?

>> patricia? self-determination. >> what? >> self-determination. ok. good, what do you think you hope he's learned in the last few months? what do you hope that he's learned? >> that you can't please everybody. >> what do you hope he's learned? >> it takes time. >> ok. >> what do you hope he's learned? >> patience. >> forget about bipartisan. >> what did you say? >> forget about bipartisan. >> i said patience. >> ok. patience. >> i hope he's learned how bad it really is on the average person. i don't know if anybody in washington really realizes it. >> ok. anybody else? >> i hope he's learned that even though it looks like it

might be easy, it's not as easy as you think especially when unforeseen things like 9/11 happen. >> do you think he has a sense of the magnitude of the job that he faces? >> i think he absolutely does. but until you face something like george bush faced, you don't really truly grasp the magnitude. he might understand it. he might believe he does. you can't understand unless you actually grasp it. >> tell me one other thing, do you feel that this is somebody who relates and understand the problems that you are facing? is this somebody who relates and understands the problems that you are facing? >> yes. >> tim? >> vick? >> i think he's extremely apathetic. >> bernadette? >> i'm not so sure.

i thought he might, but he seems to have lived a little more kushiers life. >> i think unless he's walked in patricia's life, i don't think he really knows. >> is there anything about the president that suggests that he does? >> he understands that people are hurting because they don't have health care. i think if there were would be jobs there would be health care. so that's not happening any time soon. >> patricia? >> can you repeat the question -- >> does he understand? >> does he understand? >> i don't think so. >> william? >> yeah, i think i understand. >> i just want to say when i read on a bus that he was

actually on food stamps one. so yes, i do believe he knows about the average person. >> yes, i think he does. >> john? >> i think he empathizes with the average person and understands their plate. his problem is, he doesn't know how to lead out of the problems . >> ok. final question. you've done great. and that is what didn't you get to say tonight that you said, boy, when i come here tonight i'm going to make sure i say? anybody have something that you said, boy, i have to say this. >> i want to know what's going to happen to social security. >> i talked to my aunt today and she said that her pension was cut. and she worked for aetna for 40 years and her insurance premiums has squy --

skyrocketed. it doesn't make any sense. and there was no increase on social security. >> ok. ok. tim? >> i really don't -- i cut across -- i'm a very heavily republican-leading independent. but i don't think either party cares about us at all. and i think we need a third party system in this country. i don't see how that will happen considering that third parties are blocked from entering debates. right now the democrats don't care, the republicans don't care. they care about their jobs. >> ok. anybody else? >> cheryl? >> i would like to have talked a little bit more about the social issues. >> ok. sorry we didn't. that one starts at 11:00 tonight. [laughter] >> you guys did great. thank you ever so much. i hope you had a good time. and we certainly pressure it. and it will be broadcast on c-span and we will definitely let you know. and as i just want to remind

everybody as you leave this building, is that this was done for the center. and this is an on-going project that we're doing with them. thank you very, very much. have a great night. >> great. thank you very much, john. good job. >> cheryl, appreciate you. >> thanks. >> enjoyed it. >> toing the focus group, five reporters sat down with peter hart to talk about what they learned. this is about 15 minutes. >> gene?

what surprised you? >> they don't like him for anything. total free ride so far. >> what surprised you, mark? >> i was surprised how much time they're willing to give him. i think those of us who are covering every minute in his presidency, expects him to get everything done on the economy and afghanistan seems to give him more time than the pundits do. >> mark? >> the benefit of the doubt and how complicated it is when they blame the congress for a democratic president to run against a democratic congress. >> yeah. >> charlie? >> i thoughting that among the four or five just dogged supporters of obama, boy, they hung in there. they wanted him to succeed because they wanted him to succeed. the loyalty, the allegiance to

him as a person and it just doesn't convey over. so if i were obama person, i would have very mixed feelings about watching this. but i'd know that my base really wanted me to succeed. but if i were a democratic strategist, i'd be very, very worried about this. >> katie, what did you think? >> i was just so surprised by the congress questions elicited. so much blame. and so much awareness. also the equal blame on the republicans and democrats. it was surprising to me. >> i was surprised also there wasn't more on the special interest. i thought that they would just take off. now, one thing we need to remember very quickly, and that is, we're here in the northeast. and while we've got the suburbs of philadelphia and also from new jersey and delaware, we are not talking about what we consider to be a purple area or

purple states or whatever. so some of this -- but gee, i was remarkably struck by how we get, mark, so wrapped up in the numbers. and when you step back from these numbers, and you get people's voices, boy, they came out a lot differently from the numbers or whatever. >> yeah, the -- the thing that hit me over and over again and the value of these is it really put a human face on unemployment. i mean, statistics don't bleed. but these people, you could feel the pain, the hurt, not just patricia. even bill. i thought cheryl was just phenomenal. but when bill talked about until he's walked a mile in cheryl's shoes and patricia's shoes -- i mean it was -- it was incredibly human. and you understand what people

are going through. and the fact that he still is in good shape, the president at this point, i think is all the more remarkable. i mean, really -- >> with his base. >> with his base -- >> but they were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. even john. i mean, you know, there was something. at the very end could say something positive about him. >> yeah. i found tim fascinating. >> he was interesting. really was. >> because he moved around a lot, clearly a strong republican, but at the same time saw things that -- i mean, i would say, boy, all you have to do is come here and realize if they don't do something about unemployment, they aren't understanding where we are as a country. and that is just -- i mean, it was so stark and so moving and -- patricia may have been on

the verge of tears but all of them had tearful stories one way or another. the other thing is, i was interested in your reaction to afghanistan. you know, because tomorrow they're going to make a pronouncement, but what did you think looking at this group? >> well, i felt that he -- i think the bar is higher for him than we even -- even we might have thought because i didn't pick up a lot of ambivalence about it. it seems that people sort of made up their minds. if he's going to sell, he's going to sell past existing biases to get the support. clearly the bipartisan lines were all fuzzed up. you have john saying pull out. you have tim and bill saying we've got to stay in. so people are making a decision about afghanistan based on personal experiences and their own sense of where we should

go. and not necessarily as a republican or a democrat. so i just feel he's got a much tougher sales pitch tomorrow night because they didn't seem at all convinced -- not one of them thinks we can win. and not one of them seem to have a clear understanding of what's the end game. >> the other interesting thing to me is that there has not been any rationale really articulated for afghanistan in about seven and a half years. and the facting that the group was relatively evenly split on it, despite the fact that it is territory when we haven't tried. and that nobody -- president bush wasn't talking about it for the last seven years, i thought that was kind of interesting. >> mark? >> one thing, there was no ambivalence whatsoever. but it didn't seem like the dominant issue. in fact, it only came up at the

end when it was talked about and previewing the speech that's going to happen tomorrow night. it didn't seem like if he did one think or another that this is going help him with his base. this seems issue two. >> i would take a different view. afghanistan would not play out this week. it will play out 100 weeks from now. and that's where i think the problem is. we're sighting -- citing a policyton today. but i felt there was a lot greater division here. i mean, i took the unusual stand of saying how many will stand on this. and i did that purposefully because i said, you've got to -- you have to stand to be counted. and there were six people who said they want to withdraw. and that was pretty tough, yeah. >> just to clear one