jobs. also, business roundtable president will speak. dr. cecil wilson will speak on the budget for medicare and medicaid. "washington journal" is next. . .

you can always read just add e- mail or send us a tweet. a couple of headlines before we get to our question. a look at politics and the news from "the boston globe." joseph kennedy iii will not be running for congress. a little bit of a bad story, boston.com reports that kennedy's decision -- they write that it adds a new development in the political drama over the fate of delahunt's seat.

and news this morning about the jersey senator frank lautenberg. he will be back for votes, expected tuesday. and a look this morning at the headlines in "the wall street journal" as they and other newspapers reporting in the quake -- on the quake inch chile -- -- in chile. the death toll rises. secretary of state clinton on a tour of latin america. in a "the philadelphia enquirer," --

so, secretary clayton beginning hurt toward this week in latin america. -- secretary clinton. "the new york times" reporting on the u.s. nuclear weapons strategy. of the white house is rethinking nuclear policy. the story this morning in the "the new york times."

we are going to get your thoughts on this and need -- read more on the article in just a moment. we are joined on the phone by kevin hall who writes for the mcclatchy newspapers as their economics correspondent. thank you very much for joining us. you wrote extensively last week about the news of bank failures in the u.s. what can you tell us about that? guest: federer about insurance (-uá outç its 2009 final year report -- the federal deposit insurance corporation. certainly the biggest contraction in lending since 1942, the first year the united states fully engaged in world war ii. a dramatic drop in lending. 7.4% retractions. oddly enough, two factors.

the banks are impaired and are having trouble landing, needing to those balance sheets, and consumers, 10% unemployment, but uncertainty about the economy, people are not looking for loans -- the banks are not giving them and people are not looking. host: you wrote 700 u.s. banks are distressed. one out of 11 on this list. underlying this is a failure resulting from commercial real estate loans going sour is this issue in the commercial real- estate market mirroring what happened in the residential real-estate market? guest: it is in a way. not completely. the difference is it is a problem, kind of like slow- moving ships freight train. we know it was coming. i did a little research last night and there were a number of the fdic reports that were really interesting.

on a year-to-year basis, non current loans, loans that are past due, 67.5% increase across all banks. 702 banks impaired and by comparison just about 252 the prior year. and before that, in 2007, something like 25. it gives you the impact, the kind of a snowball effect. i think it probably reflects commercial real estate and the slow moving nature of this crisis is that -- it was 144% increase in restructured loans. that tells you that banks, rather than -- they are eating the losses, restructuring the loans, trying to keep some sort of incomes strain on loans but that speaks to how impaired and impacted the economy is right now. host: another issue on greased's financial situation -- greece's

financial situation. and this morning and number of newspapers, "the financial times", fresh austerity measures. why is goldman being mentioned and what is ahead for greek finances? guest: goldman engaged in a practice on behalf of greece called currency default swap. it is real complex. but the short version is basically it is a mechanism that allows you to make your debt load looks smaller than it is. you can hide the true size of your deficit. it is something that has been in practice for a long time. it it has been found out that goldman getting the headlines, by no means alone. but why goldman is under attack now is in addition to doing that, there are indications and allegations of the also took out what are called credit defaults

swaps, like insurance. you don't even have to own the underlying assets. and you can bet against it. when general motors and chrysler was about to go bankruptcy, there was pressure on ford and when ford tried to renegotiate the debt the owners of the credit defaults swaps were trying to -- the only when when they go into default. that is what is happening with greece, international investors are betting against greek debt, sovereign debt, and doing it with spain and portugal and other countries that have deficits about to bid. the greeks are going to get the book down and severely slash public finances. that will have a social consequences, the european nations seem unwilling to lend a hand in the form of a bailout. that is the risk for the united states economy, it further impairs banks and slows the global economy that is just coming out of a recession.

and it hurts the u.s. dollar by weakening the euro which makes our exports more expensive. exports are one of the few bright spots we have pared host, one more issue. what can you tell us about senator dodd's efforts -- there is a report he will unveil a revised bill. guest: there is a lot of discussion about how to get here to there. the administration has been pushing for what is called a consumer finance protection agency. senator dodd seems to be finding a compromise with republicans that appears to have that located, not as a stand-alone agency, but within the treasury department. removes an obstacle, it happens, of getting something passed. the house and december passed its version of financial reform. there will still be a job mary up the the two different

provisions. the senate moves at a glacial pace. if it happens this week it raises the chance something gets done. the further we get from epicenter of 2008 the less urgency there is to make real change. it is a race against time, in and away. -- in a way. host: kevin hall, thanks for the update this morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: we go to your calls on the issue of u.s. nuclear weapons strategy. every board and " the new york times." the white house is rethinking nuclear policy. paul on our republican line. caller: good morning. good morning. i would like to comment on this nuclear. i go back a long way -- also on the economy. i was a combat medic in korea and item 75. i have run a business most of my life. even reducing this by 10%, we

still have enough weapons left over if we reduce it by 10% to destroy any one of these third world countries and one afternoon, we have so many weapons. as far as the economy, jobs, this is the main thing. i followed the army and weapons of my life. my son just retired with 25 years in the service as a colonel. when i shipped out to go to korea from colorado, that land between denver and colorado was a wasteland. when i go out there now to visit my son, everybody is in there in uniform. what would happen today in if we -- the whole thing is filled

in with service people. " scott part of the article in " the new york times" read to thatxd -- we will read more of that article in just a moment from çinside the " the new york tims ." caller: thank you so much for taking my call. i appreciate c-span very much. my comment is on the long term, i think it is a terrific strategy to reduce the nuclear capability because we've got so

much of anç arsenalçççç ale çable to deal with threats arod the world. ç;ççççxdçççand i thinkt of the world and then following our lead is the ideal way. this was mentioned in a great book called "blood on their hands. " i do not know if you read it or not. it is an alstom to read about -- çof some book to read about. host: who is the author? çççcaller: forest redd. çhost: ocean city, maryland. their role on the republican line. -- darrell on the republican line. i want to fight daveç wisconsin and his son for their service. i want to talk about obama's nuclear-weapons strategy. it can be good if they take the money allocated, instead of new ones, make defensive weapons to

stop the threats that we have pared -- that we have. and also, if they can take the president's delegation and go to countries like russia and iran and kind of stop them from making so many weapons. russia has allies. whether or not we believe that are together or not, it does not matter because they are because russia buildings in iran four nuclear weapons. that being said, defense of weapons are good. host: of baltimore, maryland. w7[çvxdymi]çróçthe democra' caller: how are you doing? i would want obama to reduce the nuclear weapons but i also want to say that america has the open the eyes and not let us go into war with iran because they are

putting stuff out there that iran has nuclear-weapons, and they are just trying to push obama to go into war with them and i don't believe that we should listen to those people because they are trying to set us up for another war and do away up and tried to find out how the rich people are trying to put a black face on a nuclear war. host: the president will be briefed on the options for a nuclear strategy. here is inside the "the new york times."

host: of riverside, ohio. good morning, sarah. caller: over the last five years i spent a lot of time at the international atomic energy agency's website, iaea website. i encourage people to go to the website and read the non- proliferation treaty and some of the letters other countries in the middle east have sent to the head of the iaea and other directors over the years in regards to, for instance, israel's nuclear-weapons and the threat to the middle east and how they would all like to see that area of a nuclear-free zone. with regards to us, yes, with obama, that would set the example to the rest of the world of, let us really examine this

and let us reduce, for instance, israel, i know the last president unchallenged is a realm with regard to opening up inspections was president kennedy, so at the i e a website you can access the letter president kennedy wrote to the leaders in israel with regards to opening up inspections. i think that would help settle iran down. they obviously feel threatened about what we have done in their neighborhood and the threats is room makes to them constantly. we should definitely look at this and obama would be setting the tone and example by looking at our own nuclear arsenals. host: can you share with us where we will find that? what is the website? caller: you could just google iaea or international atomic energy agency. and also at the u.n. site there

are a lot of documents and letters with regard to the nuclear standing of different countries in the world. both are excellent. mordecai vanunu, and he was an israeli scientist who exposed what was there. i know is wrong has released them from prison. host: here it is "los angeles times." iran relations with iaea turns contentious. phoenix, good morning to tiffany on our independent line.

caller: good morning, how are you? good. i want to start off by saying i am pretty young, i will be 23 march 20. i have been watching c-span, 4:00 in the morning i would get up. host: thank you for doing that. probably a couple of weeks ago a gentleman said it gives a regular people a window into congress to see what is going on. i think it is pretty interesting myself. really what i want to say about the administration about this nuclear deal going on -- it is kind of needs. at this time, do we really want to have talked about eliminating nuclear-weapons around the world? i'm not sure. it but i think it is going to

give someone else the power to provide the people -- there are going to be bad people all over the world. host: i have to let you go. thank you for the comment. a reminder to listeners and viewers, make sure you meet your television or radio. the article is the issue about u.s. nuclear weapons strategy, it comes from " the new york times, reporting on president obama getting an update from secretary gates and others about nuclear policy. they write other officials not officially allowed to speak on the issue say in back channel discussions with allies, the administration has been quietly broaching the question about whether to withdraw tactical nuclear weapons from europe. at the same time, the new document would steer the united states toward a more non-nuclear defenses that would rely more on missile defense, most within striking distance of the persian gulf. from " the new york times" this morning. connie, democrat caller.

caller: i keep wondering -- is the purpose of the question to seek information or is it to undermine the administration? i can't figure it out. we have two wars going on and on -- i cannot figure out why. is it really to gain information from of yours or is it to undermine the administration because quite often on c-span i listened to these questions -- it seems like everything is about, is obama doing the right thing. you read into it, is obama doing the right thing. i cannot figure it out. i know when bush was in office, i did not vote for him, but i supported him because he was the leader of the free world and i did not say all this undermining of him. two years left in his term -- people stood behind him. every time i looked around, obama is being undermined. i am not saying it is you

personally. i just wish you all would be fair to this president and stop misleading questions because your questions the way it is framed -- as if it is true, so you are giving people opinion, do you think or should he not do it. i would say let us try to stand behind the president and stop undermining him. holes cut connie, we appreciate your input -- host: connie, we appreciate your input. our sole reason for its request is to give you a chance to weigh in with your opinion on the issues of the day, whenever that you may be. we really appreciate you calling what your view this morning. michigan, john on the independent line. go ahead. caller: top of the morning, how are you? my opinion is, i think obama is doing the right thing. i think he is a very knowledgeable man. i think he has a cool hand --

like the call he might get at 3:00 in the morning, what is going to do? armageddon could be -- you know. we don't need any more nuclear weapons. we have enough silos, submarines all over the globe. it only takes a few. bonds today are much more powerful than hiroshima and nagasaki. we don't need any more nuclear weapons. we have more than enough to destroy the whole globe. idefensively, that is what we've got to watch. some tyrants, however it may be. i don't think china is even a threat to us. who is going to want to blow up the bread basket of the global? we could have the ability to produce more food than any nation in the earth. who wants to blow up? it does not make sense. but if you get some not less the

capability, that is what we have to prevent. host: back to the article in "the new york times."

new york. melissa on the democrats' line. caller: the question in regards to the president of the nine states rethinking the agenda for nuclear weapons. i think it is a good idea. i think definitely -- right now he is the president of peace. it seems are around the world the united states has so much respect now than in the past. and i think that's all of the information we are receiving as far as iran has nuclear weapons or this person may have nuclear- weapons, we did not have to go have the same issues we had when the bush administration when there was no weapons of mass destruction. they were never found.

i think this is a smart president. he is going to take his time, he is going to weigh his options and he is going to find -- where he does not put all of our children in a dangerous position that i want to give a response to the other caller -- as far as the undermining of his administration. i think she is kind of wrong on c-span. c-span is very fair. i watch c-span in the morning. but she does make a point and other media, always questioning and throwing light some sort of -- where the american public has doubt. all of this doubt out here in the media. i think with the american public, and it just makes fear. host: used the word undermining.

the media may be undermining the present but they are creating this fear? caller: i really feel that. i'm young. i have to tell you, i voted for mr. obama. never really been a major politics, never really been into politics but the best president has really started a lot of young people into really motivating a lot of young people into politics. is he doing to much? all of these lies. trans. administration -- everything is on line. you could see everything. he constantly tells us that.

live is and lies, all of this doubt. host: we appreciate your view this morning. larry from oak grove, illinois with a republican view. caller: the more i listen to c- span lately the market disappointed i am in the callers calling in. this reduction of nuclear weapons is almost irrelevant. we already have been built. obama it is supposedly a brilliant legal mind, he should use those as a bargaining chip before you are going to announce you are going to reduce them. if they are redundant and we will reduce them anyway, don't tell the enemies upfront. use them as a negotiating chip with nations like iran and career and surrounding nations that already have nuclear weapons, that we are willing to do this if you do this for usçç

and help control nuclear proliferation and the middle east. this is supposed to be a brilliant legal mind. where is it? thank you. host: highland park, illinois. caller: i listened to c-span every morning and i want to thank c-span for its programming. kg2vyou know, when it comes to zínx;:dñp%ó?u,3ççi]ço çare anti-israel call up and me comments against israel but you çnever hear them sayççç inxg ;p!outçççç how the arabs or bustles and israel or sit -- sheep rockets into the heart of israel. i think they should look at both sides of the story before they lambast israel all the time. it seems like there are a whole group of them and they cannot wait to put is rubdown every chance they get. i thank you. host: about 50 minutes of your calls on the u.s. nuclear

strategy -- about 15 minutes of your calls on the u.s. nuclear strategy. from "the washington times" on the economy. kansas city star, kansascity.com. comments from senator john kyl. congress will pass jobless benefits, a gop senator says.

terry in paris, illinois. independent line. caller: i feel the united states is doing the right thing. like the old saying, in one guise or in the basement, two guys and the basement and one guy has eight mansions and the other guy has nine but they are full of gasoline up to their chest and a half to keep the guy from opening the door and striking his match and destroying the whole thing. what it all amounts to being, i

have 100% stake in the decisions made by this country. and they are keeping us safe. to me, that is most of the ball game. there are a lot of things i could say, but i'm proud to be part of the country. thank you. host: of gregory in manhattan -- gregory in manhattan. aucaller: president obama is making the proper evaluation of protecting america. in regards to being "the most powerful nation" on earth, we might have two options. therefore we did not have to go military crazy. he should ease back. keep everybody safe, blah, blah, and blah. one thing about c-span -- one newspaper you quote consistently, the racist rag of "the new york post." i think you need to qualify news

sources. that is considered the rack of new york city. i did not know if you are aware of their reputation. if not, send some of your researchers to new york city and ask what the population believes about "the new york post. " it is not a strong reference point. host: you are in manhattan. what newspaper do you read? caller: "the new york times" and "the new york daily news" news "newsday." it is a racist rag. host: among other papers, we get to it. we do have in my stack and we will perhaps around to it. and screen input. we are reading an article from "the new york times" about nuclear strategy.

they write that mr. obama has complained in recent months that he has failed to break through the bush era national policy security policy in some fundamental way. west hills, randy, independent. caller: a couple of points. the strategy about nuclear weapons in the middle east and the second is about the media in general. first i want to say, regardless of what obama does or decides to do, he would be a lot more effective if people in this country were more unified behind him as they were behind bush after 9/11. the danger has not passed. we still face great danger from terrorists around the world.

and for the republicans to say they want to see obama failed -- failed, i cannot fathom any more leverage for terrorists to see our in fighting like this and to see half of our country basically calling for obama's neck and went to see him fail and rush limbaugh going on radio saying he wants to see the president fail and all of the republicans' so-called leaders not disputing that, that gives the terrorists a lot more leverage because they see us divided. in a big way, osama bin laden has already succeeded in this plan. he spent only a million dollars bringing down two huge buildings and he ended up breaking our economy eventually and dividing this country in half and while we fight each other they are laughing their butts off at us house the but we are that we are fighting over political differences and not unify. host: randy, your comments on

nuclear weapons policy -- anything additional? caller: what i was saying about nuclear-weapons, regardless of what he will do about nuclear- weapons, we are not unified behind our president. the second point i wanted to make about the media in general is that i know that people, if they have political leaning one way or the other, they see the media being against them but the media in general usually point to the microphone at whatever voice is the loudest. i remember the town hall meetings, people were shouting, and about 15-second clips of people shouting at the top of their lungs and a loop over and over again. host: here is the latest " foreign affairs klaus " magazine.

there lead article. inside, in this extensive article, the authors write -- alexandria, virginia, kennedy -- kenny, democratic collaller.

caller: the idea that -- the increase we have spent, according to the brookings institute in 1998, and we have to spend $6 trillion -- we have spent $6 trillion sent to the invention of nuclear weapons and the use of nuclear weapons. oppenheimer, i heard him speak -- host: $6 trillion on our nuclear program or what? caller: onç nuclear weapons sie the 1940's. aç oppenheimer, who invented, spoke out against them. so, on we are spending say 80 or so billion dollars to keep them

safe a year. as we deal with health care and basic stuff to getçsgiççççy ourselves here,w3 that it is vey important that the president decrease and decrease and decrease -- that is what we need to invest in beard -- investment. that is what they are making money on. guest: bruce in black water. the republican line. i think it would be a mistake to do awayç with the nuclear weapons. i saw recently on the news that russia build a new missile delivery to other countries. i think it would be a mistake. the other thing i would like to say is, i was c-span and " washington journal" would not center people off the station, i know they do. host: we did not send sir

anybody. our for room is open -- we do not censor anybody. our forum is open. a tweet -- hutchinson, kansas on our independent line. good morning. caller: -- host: we will go to bill in indianapolis. caller: i would like to comment that these two political parties squabbling, fighting, lying, cheating is typical to what happened to germany. all kinds of bad things slipped then just because of all of this two-party fighting.

every time i hear somebody say they don't like big government, government works, but it is sabotaged. by all of the money that comes into washington. it is just absolutely sabotage. it is not big government, it is people who do not want controls over greed. thank you. host: now we have hutcheson, kansas. good morning. go ahead. caller: i tend to concur with the callers who advocated using nuclear weapons with a bargaining -- as a bargaining chip. i think whether or not nuclear- weapons should be eliminated is really a moot point, they exist, and the knowledge to produce them exists. and hopefully in the future

there may be a way to control them. i think it would be a mistake to deliberately limit, in terms of the definition of the use of them -- they are a weapon. the fact is, they could be used the sensibly or ostensibly. and i think it would be a mistake, as one of the callers said previously, to take the first strike option off of the table in terms of our -- host: 1 earlier called used the term gardlin chips. do you think main demonstration is using -- giving away too much of its leveraged or bargaining ability? caller: i don't know, but i am somewhat suspicious of the administration in that regard.

i&there is a lot of pressure on them from the left -- i understand that there is a lot of pressure on them from the left who is traditionally opposed to nuclear weapons. i do not know of anyone who actually advocates the use of nuclear weapons. it is just a reality of the 21st century that they exist. i think it is best to use them to our advantage in terms of our national security in any way that we can. host: de -- thank you for the call. the president has his annual physical. in excellent health. routine check of fine, but they caution mr. obama continues to struggle to stop his 30-year smoking habit and needs to modify his diet, according to his doctor, a navy captain who led the medical team.

modesto, california -- on the democrats' line? make sure you turn down your television or radio. i am going to put you on hold for a second, modesto, and we will see about nick from michigan on our republican line. çcaller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i'm calling with regard to a program on "theç history chann" çregarding the manhattan proje. definitely it cost a lot of money. but a study was done about the total number of military and war deaths throughout the world and after the development of nuclear weapons, it has gone down to about 1 million deaths worldwide. because there are wars constantly, all over the whole world every single day.

of course, in world war i, 70 million deaths and world war ii, over 50 million deaths. but after the development of nuclear weapons it is an average of about 1 million. the strategy is fear. fear is what keeps people from breaking into banks, from stealing from your neighbors. if you did not have a fear of punishment, you would do whatever you wanted to do. so, in my opinion, all of the expense of four nuclear weapons has prevented the next world war. we hadqq over 12,000 deaths per month in just the united states with our military during world war ii. fortunately now, we have a 10- year war, the number of deaths is very small. even though we mourn every single one. but if we had been fighting a world war ii-type war, we would have over 120,000 deaths.

you do the math. i just got a little confused here. host: nick, thank you for sharing your your views. thank you for all of the calls. next we will look at the week ahead on capitol hill and at the white house. health care certainly and other issues ahead in the house and senate and what the white house agenda is as well. we will speak to will englund who covers the whiteçççç hoh "the national journal" and we will speak to patricia murphy from politics daily. right after this.

of reconstructionçça#oçxdñ+ iraq and afghanistan. çrepresentatives fromç the ste andç defenseçu! departments ad u.s. agency for international development talk aboutç oversight agency toçç reducee andççxd fraud. that is live atç 9:30 a.m. eastern on cm$ñan2. ççççtoday,ç house majorityr president's recentlyw3 createdwç bipartisan fiscal commission charged with recommended solution for reducing the federal deficit. watch his remarks live --

ç >>ç ç"washington journal" continues. ççhost: a look atç the week d in congress andç capitol hill. joining us is pstricia murphy with "politics daily." and we havew3 willç englund fr" the national journal." thank you for being with us this morning. patricia murphy, i will start with you. the end of the week last week president obama held a health care summit with republicans and democrats. that is done. what are we going to see legislatively this week on health care?

guest: of the first thing people on the hill will be looking for is this message from president obama how he once again to proceed. at the end of the week he promised to give directions to congress about that. it actually represents the first time he has done that for congress. he spent the last year listening to people, listening to both sides, saying he is open to we have not gotten a whole bunch of direction from him on process. this question we have to hurt coming up over and over again, will democrats tried to go the reconciliation process that requires 51 votes instead of 60? the real problem is on the house side. it on the senate side, they can get the 51 votes, should not be a problem. on the house side, can pelosi rebuild the coalition that put health care through the first time? she had a couple of high-profile to -- two retirements and congressman murtha, with his staff recently, those are three boats down she had before.

congressman yao said he voted forçxd it the firstçc'xgn tis republican and now he will not vote for it -- host of a congressman from louisiana. guest: he voted for it the first time. he is a devout catholic, very pro-life. nancy pelosi really has her vote cut out for her. to see if she will be able to build thet( coalition appeared host of will englund, at the white house, what is their view? are they saying it is in your court? guest: american samoa robert gibbs said, this is a dynamic process -- as robert gibbs said. çqokthere is large agreement bn the parties. çi did not know if they have an expectation the republicans will join him in a bill, but the inside the white house person handling health care reform will

be talking to both democrats and republicans over the next several days as the white house tries to come up with its plan on how to go forward. they are expecting a statement from the president probably wednesday -- host: on health care? guest: onç health care. host: end the conversation with david gare great -- in a conversation with david gregory, -- i want to play this. >> as they made the decision, given the results of the summit that you got to move forward with reconciliation, justice and the majority and losing the opportunity to bring republicans along? >> look, he will have more to say this week on how he thinks is the best way to move forward. i think what is important is we have fundamental problems with our insurance market. we have insurance companies sending up premium increases of 39% out in california. these are problems that need to

be fixed and the president hears every day from americans. host: but you have to go through a procedure to get there. i have heard from some people a decision has been made -- reconciliation, go through unless what is talking about is not possible. >> i do know this, health care reform has passed both the house and senate would not just the majority in the senate, but a super majority for not talking about changing roles. all the president is talking about the we need to address this problem and it doesn't make sense to have a simple up and down vote on whether to fix the problems? host: she talked about the rising insurance rates. does that play into the advantage of the folks who want to get the legislation through? guest: i think the biggest argument is to say if we do nothing your insurance rates will go through the roof. people are seeing it in their daily lives. people and california -- in

california, in individual markets, rates going up almost 40% this year. republicans agree, too, there is a problem. that is the only thing they agreed about last week. yes, we know something is wrong and we need to fix it. there was little agreement, though, on thursday on how to fix it. democrats were having an incredibly hard time convincing the american people -- at the same time when trust in the government is at an all-time low, that the government is the root to fix it for you. there's really no debate about how serious this problem is. there is a huge debate and at this point almost and consolidate. -- insoluble the date. -- debate.

host: switching gears a little bit. with all of this discussion on health care, is there any sense of frustration that they are not able to work on other things they want to get done? energy, financial market overall? guest: in a broad sense, there is this frustration. but on a day-to-day basis, this white house always says a lot -- it can walk and chew gum at the same time. this morning the president is making an appearance at the america's promise alliance meeting to talk about education. tomorrow he goes to savannah to talk about technology and probably education and something like that. he meets with secretary gates of this to afternoon to talk about the nuclear posture review. they keep going on all the friends. i think the frustration is probably with the slowness in congress in dealing with issues such as energy regulation.

host: patricia murphy wrote a column this weekend -- "hey, congress, you're fired." how what they fare on basic performance reviews -- you are the one writing about it. what grade? guest: failed to meet expectations. i wrote in this column at the end of this week where there was supposed to be this big bipartisan summit and they would get around the table and discuss all of the matter is an absolutely nothing cannot accept out clear the differences were. neither side gave the other really the time of day. their heels were so clearly dug- in. the president was the only person really to said that is a pretty good idea -- he said that to john mccain. i said that to myself -- i work

and private sector, corporations, performance reviews. it is not a good excuse saying you cannot get along with your colleagues. you disagree with how to solve the problem so you will not deal with it. at the end of the week, i just could not contain myself. it was very frustrating to watch these problems that the country is facing is enormous and congress is doing almost nothing to fix them, and the point of the white house can chew gum and walk of the same time, congress can't. now have a hard time. while health care sucks up oxygen the jobs bill has very little attention paid to appear in unemployment insurance expired yesterday -- cobra extensions for people who have been out of work along this are not being dealt with. financial regulatory reform is not being dealt with because health care it is sucking up so much oxygen. host: we have plenty waiting, starting with jeff from west

virginia. caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. as far as the present administration goes, he is a very intelligent man but i cannot think he is in charge of his own party because he had a summit with the republicans and says what he wants to do and then what happens, pelosi gets on tv and says this is what we are going to do -- which is not what he says. therefore, if you have somebody say one thing and somebody stabbing you in the back, i think there is no leadership. as far as the young lady, i think she is right. the congress and the senate, they can't chew gum at the same time they cannot even tie their shoes at the same time. people are losing their jobs and every time we turn around we hear nothing but people saying, we have to get health care. when you have people going to the hospital 98 years old and being charged for pap smears just so the hospital can make money up that they are losing on

medicare and stuff, you know, let's get real. watch "60 minutes." watched c-span when that guy who was on the a couple months ago but that book telling what the problem is with medical. as far as the president goes with the nuclear problem, i really think he would be a fool to reduce anything because if you think that the people in the other countries like iran, correa, are going to say, ok, we are going to reduce things -- no. i am in my 50s. i lived through the peace movement, free love and all of that. what we got was literally is screwed up the backside. host: lots on the table. will englund. guest: let me talk about the nuclear issue in a second. in terms of reducing the amount of nuclear weapons that we have, the corresponding country

there is not iran or north korea, which, even if theyç get nuclear, a small number. but we're talking about -- -- the relationships with russia. the nuclear arms reduction treaty expired in december and the americans and russians are grinding away toward a new treaty. i don't think there is likely to be any re-çworking of the nuclr posture until such a treaty is arrived at. the danger of -- and i danger is if the u.s. and russia cut their levels too low, it might encourage the next tier of countries, like china and india, to try toç think, we can match these guys. .

i would like to, first of all, for the inspectors to inspect the nuclear arsenal to see if we with a first country that would have a reason that would try to justify using it. next, health care and obama. if he comes through some of these things for reconciliation

, the tax breaks allow the filthy rich to get richer. we have a saying, you sacrifice a few for the sake of many. host: he mentioned 2003. was that the last time it was used? guest: we know it has been used 22 times in the modern congress. both president bush paused used it for their own tax cuts. reconciliation is usually used for budget measures and an increase in taxes. there was an attempt by the republicans under george bush to allow drilling in the anbar province. it was pushed back by george bush, the person deciding it is the senate parliamentarian, really, your standard government

issue bureaucrat, and you have these major issues, you are talking about the president's key domestic priorities coming down to one man saying that you can do reconciliation or you cannot. the direction that the democrats have gotten is that no, they cannot do all of healthcare reconciliation. what they want to do, and this is where they have a huge problem, the house is going to have to pass the exact same piece of legislation, then at last it signed into law by the president. needing to make the bill more like what house members want it to look like. you are asking house members who deplore the abortion language in the bill, the excise tax, many of them have a huge problem with it. they want to raise taxes on wealthy americans, not done in

the senate bill. they have to vote for this bill and trust that the senate will come back to make it look the way they want. if you think there is tension between republicans and democrats, look at the senate and democrats and democrats. there is no trust at all. they do none know how nancy pelosi can convince their members to vote for this bill and convince their members to go home and said they voted for the abortion language, but i am sure that we will be able to change that in time. host: political considerations get tougher and tougher. >> we have primaries -- guest: we have primaries coming up tomorrow, looking at the general lection, these guys do not want to jump off of a cliff. they will lose their jobs. caller: good morning, i agree

with the young lady. i think that senator obama should have them run that bill through congress for reconciliation as fast as he can possibly get them to move. on the nuclear issue, i believe that was a foolish political move that will have the right wing and the conservatives coming out in droves. the 2010 election, he handed them a double issue. he cannot get anything done and he is still forming the united states. it will be very bad news for the democratic party area that it has been one mistake, hounded by another. let's get the health care done, that is what the people really

need. the sooner, the more possible. host: brian, independent line. caller: i agree with the gentleman that just called about health care. reform needs to past. i hope that the president and the democrats of listening, you need to do this quickly and fairly, which i think they are trying to do. i am a socialist, but not like old russia or iran, iraq. socialism is serious, not symbols of a plot. why -- congressman greener said this very directly, they are

scared that they will lose millions in campaign contributions when -- and i do say when, health care reform passes. being a real about it, they will lose a lot of money. host: thank you for the call. any thoughts, will englund? guest: the way the congress works today, there is a strong incentive not to agree, there is more political benefit in obstruction then there is in actually compromising in reaching a deal. issues that do not get solved, they are great money raisers for politicians. in maryland we had a question about whether we would have slot machines or not and it went on for four years. he began to realize that the

last thing they wanted to do was make a decision one way or another, there is a similar dynamic with health care. host: what is the latest on the health-care battle for harry reid? guest: he is under water, as is the president. harry reid is really struggling, he has had a series of close elections, if it were today he would lose. no question. he is banking on the fact that if he can get health care through, he can go back to say -- look what i have done for you as your leader. he has single-handedly killed the idea of having a nuclear waste repository outside of las vegas, something that has been dangling out there for years.

now that he is the majority leader, that idea is completely gone. if he were a more junior senator, you would have to think that nevada would be high up on a list as the president talks about bringing nuclear power back to the country. host: we have a story here about their below the radar race to become the next majority leader, dick durbin. butch in jackson, wyoming. caller: we need to keep our focus on health care. having health care based on employment is turning the job market. other countries with universal health care, the government

picks it up and the people make the product of industry. we are competing like it is a car, although manufacturers by putting more on automobiles because of health care. how can we defeat -- this is a jobs issue as well. people talking about socialism, we are in a fascist country, corporations are running the country. the people in government, which is what government is, the people, we need a social system for single payer system that can compete with the rest of the world in health care. thank you. host: will englund, did you cover the event at blair house? guest: yes, i did. host: we have not seen an event

like every president in recent memory. guest: it was promoted as a bipartisan summit, and one of the issues that was clear was that one party did not share the urgency of the other party, i did find it interesting. many people said it was just talking points and people digging their heels in, but at least they were talking to each other with their talking points rather than to the television cameras. to me it was not revelatory, but i found it interesting to watch. host: in a recent national journal article, one of your colleagues wrote about how a congressman and senators vote. the question whether obama should shuffle his staff.

as his poll numbers have fallen , "as initiatives have stalled, the president must reassign some of his top of visors. some argue that the success of his presidency hangs in the balance. -- balance." is there any edgy -- any indication the changes are coming in the oval office? guest: i would be surprised if any were in the immediate offing. they do not want to show weakness at this moment when they're trying to get health care legislation through. this array rogers left on friday, not that she is involved in these political negotiations, but i would be surprised to see anything in the next couple of weeks. host: amanda, republican line.

caller: good morning. this health care is not a republican or democratic issue, this is an american issue. we are not a fascist country, this is the greatest country in the world. a proven fact, historical, economic, proven, we have succeeded more than any country or people on the face of the planet. i do not want to be europe. i want to be america. i do not want socialized medicine or socialize anything. i want to be american, i want to follow the constitution. why do you think that people are willing to die to give to this country? this is the greatest place on the planet. yes, we have done things that are wrong. the good can no way the bad in some places, and many people have died to make this country what it is and that should not be in vain.

obama is a socialist. the new word is now progressivism. you can package it however you want, but it is socialism. communism. the american people need to look at our president, who is following in the footsteps of saul alinski. thank you very much. i love this country. everyone in this country, if you do not like it, moved to europe. host: thank you. she used the term, socialism. a term that has been used by senators in texas. host: -- guest: a couple of months ago i interviewed the head of the socialist party, asking if he was excited to have

a socialist in the white house, bringing up this conflict of the president being a socialist and increasing the role of government. but he had a different point in august, saying that obama is not a socialist, he is a corporatist, doing -- giving everything to the corporations, giving them everything that they need, taking their -- taking our money and giving it to private wealth managers. the head of the socialist party does not believe that obama is a socialist and is very disappointed. host: we are going to talk to the head of the business roundtable, john castellani, with the president spoke to last week, he has made a number of overtures to the business community. guest: he has. i have had the opportunity to be a correspondent in moscow for several years. i can tell you, there's a world

of difference between here and moscow, world of difference between what obama is talking about doing here in the soviet union, and then in russia, we are a long ways from that. host: athens, georgia, good morning. caller: i have a couple of comments and one question. i am an independent, no one owns me. i do not like labels. liberal, progressive, we are doing a disservice to the american people by labeling. that is one of the requests i have of the media. please, knocked off. if that lady from ohio had read her opinion in the 20th-century, she would know the difference between communism and socialism.

what we are talking about in health care is shared responsibility. the gentleman before that mentioned competition. when we put it on the backs of the employers instead of using the government to do this, we put them at a disadvantage, he is correct. we are a global economy and we are trying to export. when we tried to sell the costs to the health care, believe me, we are all paying for it. there is no free lunch. at 17% of the economy, those are jobs. many of which are held by winning -- by women. the medical industry is associated greatly with jobs for women. we need to look at that as well, i think that that is an issue. because we are totally now just ignoring the theology of the

planet, that business of a 39% increase in premiums in california, that is going to go by really quick. when the next thing hits based on the need, it will hit us on the west coast like it does -- like it did in chile. when that happens in los angeles and san francisco, which have been warning for some time -- there is a great program on pbs about f -- -about it, believe me, politics are going to slide across the table and it will be a done deal because everyone will be rushing to help the people in california. let's get real about those things. healthcare is a matter for the government to be involved in. we will pay for it.

guest: that is the area of crisis for the obama administration right now. he won with it the support of independent voters. he picked up those governors races from the democrats that were holding them, which was because of the independent voters. that is the fear of every senator up for re-election right now, they know they need to do better with independent voters. that is why they started to change the conversation back to jobs from health care, he was under water right now. they do not believe that obama is handling the issue well. as you have seen, the oxygen is getting sucked up by that entire discussion.

it has a lot to do with independent voters. host: senator lamar alexander yesterday on "this week" talked about what would happen politically should the democrats use reconciliation to pass health care legislation. here are his comments. >> the reconciliation procedure is a little-used procedure, for the purpose of taxing and spending and reducing deficits. the difference here is that there has never been anything of this size, magnitude, or complexity, run through the senate in this way. there are many technical problems that we could discuss. it would be the end of the united states senate as a protector of minority rights. it would be a political kamikaze mission for the democratic party if they jam this through after

the american people have been saying look, we are trying to tell you in every way we know how, we do not want this. >> strong words, saying that it could be the end of the senate. guest: it struck me as a bit strong. he said it would be the end of the senate as the protector of minority rights. clearly, welfare reform went to reconciliation, which was as close to his big deal. host: why did it take that long to take that bill to go through? guest: there were not enough votes to close the filibuster. guest: i have heard quite a bit of internal republican polling that shows that they could well take over the house and senate, republicans, if the democrats go reconciliation. the democratic response is to

say that americans do not care about the process, they care about policy. but now we find out that they do care about the process, special deals for curtain -- certain states, go on behind closed doors. c-span wrote the letter and said that the process is not what you promised. thursday is a direct result of that, they had not lived up to the process of keeping it transparent. democrats have a responsibility on the process issue, but they're banking on the response that once the bill passes, people will start to see the parts that will be good for them personally, and they will forgive the process and move on. host: john, new york city, democratic caller. make sure that you mean your television so that we can hurt your -- weaken your comments. caller: is that all right? host: co-head.

-- go ahead. caller: there have been a number of compelling articles saying that fee-for-service is a component. do these bills address the issue? host: thank you, do either of you know? guest: it is addressed as far as special reconciliation goes. they have penalize the doctors for a negative outlook that it may have been an error on their part. this is to say that they were going to pay for the outcome, not how it is being done, rather than paying for the health care

directly. host: republican line, the morning. caller: i have called my congressman, i am trying to figure out who these 20 million people are that they want to cover when they keep saying that there are 45 to 50 million not colored. -- not covered. who qualifies as these 20 million people? like congresswoman does not seem to know, i hope that you folks do. guest: the number of uninsured, the big increase would come from medicaid eligibility. certain states, nebraska, indiana, for instance, their rates would raise considerably. also, iprovisions in the bill to

deny coverage. host: "the new york times" reporting this morning about chris dodd and financial legislation that will likely move forward with a revised package, they are talking about this consumer protection peace. writing that rather than a stand-alone agency, chris dodd has proposed creating financial protection within the treasury department, a bureau that would have an independent director appointed by the president and a budget financed by large banks and lenders." the house has passed their bill, the senate has obviously still got to finish. does the white house support this particular effort? " -- guest: the white house

would certainly prefer the house bill. guest: i do not know where the white house comes down on this, some americans, according to polling, there is a real distrust when you talk about timothy geithner or, who has taken on a whole lot of political weight, not something that seems entirely independent, if you think that the department of treasury as part of the problem. i think that that is what the house bill does. i am sure that this is a compromise that senator dodd has come to, this being the key piece of legislation that he wants to handle before he retires. host: donna, good morning. caller: health insurance reform is all about jobs.

every day employers are laying off or not hiring new employees because of health insurance premiums. but we do not get the true picture from the media, because they get their advertising dollars from the insurance company. for over 30 years, there has not been any abortion funding in either bill. i do not trust this still pack and his crowd. how much they getting from the insurance companies? they should worry more about the working class people that could not afford to purchase preventative health care for themselves, as they're paying for these representatives health care. lastly, miss ohio, you do not have to die to be a patriot. it takes courage to stand up to these credit card companies.

they have brainwashed that lot of people against what is in their own interest. washington, d.c., you are immoral. host: think your that input. cathy? caller: the reason why the young lady up there said that president obama's numbers were dropping and that the republicans were picking up, government does not run the house and the senate. second, all of these people running around saying that they do not want the health care, why would you sign a piece of paper and not have it? that is why president obama was elected. i work for the department of defense. my health care goes up every year and i get less and less.

i do not care about the tate party -- the tea party or rick perry, do you know why they will lose a lot of votes? i am tired of people saying that this country, the majority of people saying they do not want it. that is not the point. they need to get on these insurance companies, working with republicans, they spent eight months working on this. host: thank you for that, we will let you go there. patricia murphy, there were all kinds of states last year. if you had to pick one, when would you see a passing? guest: [laughter] if i knew that -- [laughter] the white house has said that they would like to see something

passed in six weeks or so. they cannot afford to have this going to the summer. the tea party crowd will be out there, picking when the members go home over the summer. very effective picketing from them, and the moderates are responding. they feel very afraid do vote for this after the appearances at their august recess. i think that the specifics of what they need to do to pass the bill through the house, the president signs it and they draft a reconciliation bill for its budget impact evaluation, they have declared that they will not vote for a certain bill over a certain amount. host: will the president get more or fewer in bytes as the year goes by?

guest: that will be interesting to see. i expected he will still get the invites, a republican last week told me that if johnson were still around, we would not have this problem. he was wishing that obama would be more like lyndon johnson. host: will englund, patricia murphy, thank you both for joining us this morning. guest: thank you. guest: thank you. host: john castellani joins us for the next 45 minutes. your calls as well. first a news update from c-span radio. >> president obama begins the week with a focus on education and keeping kids in schools at an event this morning hosted by: powell and his wife.

the president has announced a plan offering $900 million in grants for low performing schools. getting the money will require actions by the participants, such as reopening as charter schools, closing out right, or replacing principles. later the president met with ray low hood and robert gates. politico reports that tommy thompson is considering running against russ feingold. mr. thompson, a fourth term governor, is securing financial pledges and reaching out to onetime political aides. it meetings go well, an exploratory committee might be set up near the end of march according to the former state secretary. bill holder announced today that he will challenge blanche lincoln in this year's

democratic senate primary, the clearing in a video that washington no longer works for families across arkansas. a former clinton administration official, he was elected lieutenant governor in 2006. >> today, part ii on a hearing on reconstruction contracts in iraq and afghanistan. representatives from the u.s. agency of international development talk about interagency coordination and a proposed new government oversight agency to reduce waste and fraud. live on c-span 2. >> today, house majority leader, steny hoyer, talks about the president's recently created bipartisan fiscal commission with recommendations for reducing the federal deficit.

watch his remarks live today on c-span. >> tonight, patrick leahy kicks off the technology exhibition that highlights emerging technologies for congressional members and staff, 8:00 eastern on c-span 2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: john castellani joins us, he is the president of the business roundtable. the president spoke to your group last week, what did you hear? guest: that he believed in the free enterprise system and the private sector as important, and that he wanted to work with us to get the economy going and create jobs. it was a good message and it was important that it was heard and that we follow through, that we

get policies that help the economy grow and overcome the uncertainty we are facing. host: so the comments made by the president last week, a meeting like that how was that organized? do they come to you and say they have a message guest: we invited him, as we have always invited presidents in the history of our meetings. they have a very good perspective with what is going on in the economy and what it takes to grow the economy and create jobs. we wanted a chance to hear what was on his mind, as well as tell him what we were seeing in the if. host: speaking largely about health care, amongst your 160

members, what is their biggest concern about the country and how the administration is approaching health care or whatever? guest: we need to make sure that the financial sector is operating efficiently. it is our source of capital and how we do business in the united states and around the world. we need to reduce the cost of health care. every one of these companies provide health care for their employees, the biggest cost pressure that we face. we need meaningful reform so that we can improve the quality and reduce the trajectory of cost. we need certainty around cap and trade. we need to know how it will be allocated. there is a lot of discussion about what is in the air right

now, the discussion being about inhibiting investment, which inhibits job creation. we need the right answer, but we need answers. host: the president made some comments about when banks fail. i want to play you his remarks and get your thoughts. host -- >> we should make it easier for small businesses to get loans. we should invest in infrastructure projects that lead to new jobs in the construction industry. we should provide a tax incentive for large businesses like yours to invest in new plants and equipment. that would make a difference now. we need business to support these efforts. the business roundtable supported the recovery act, for which i am grateful. but i think that one of the reasons businesses have not been as vocal about their support is this belief that extraordinary

measures like the recovery act work our financial stability plan, rep -- representing a lasting increase in government intervention. let me assure you, they do not. host: address concerns about a permanent presence of government intervention. guest: and he is right to point out that concern. clearly we had extraordinary circumstances a few years ago with the collapse of the financial system. we recognize that it would take extraordinary measures to stabilize that. the congress deserves a lot of credit -- credit for acting quickly. now it is time to allow the markets to work so that they can officially begin creating jobs and efficiently begin creating

the kind of activity that we all want to see so that the economy is moving forward. another part of the discussion that was important. they've discussed very much what small business can do for the economy, and small business is very important, but one of the points from our members was that this was not just small business. we also need big business to get moving in order for small business to get moving. host: the president mentioned tax incentives for big businesses. >> one of the interesting debates going on right now, right now there are reasons in the tax code, tax credit depreciation, small business expenses that have expired. one could argue the fact that they have not been extended and

acted again into law is probably more of a detrimental impact on the economy than any jobs bill that the congress might be passing with regard to new jobs. we need that certainty in the tax code. host: in terms of small birds -- small business as opposed to big business, is it easier for a member to say that everyone is in favor for small rather than they? guest: -- rather than big? guest: that is the political reality. but remember, every time boeing cells around the world, 12,000 small businesses right on the wings of that. small-business vendors and suppliers that depend on big companies for their livelihood. host: the lines are open for john castellani of the business roundtable. for democrats, 202-737-0002.

for republicans, 202-737-0001. for independents, 202-628-0205. maryann, syracuse, your first up. >> -- caller: midmorning. -- good morning. i heard about the $30 billion that could be going into help for credit for businesses. i was wondering about your guests opinion on the argument that the fda should be having that money so they can do direct funding or if should be going to the banks. my opinion is that the banks had a chance at this already. small business is a big deal in this country. fda to set up to do more

assessment for small businesses. that is where i would prefer to see ago. what do you folks think? guest: a good point. by the way, i grew up in the syracuse area, right outside of steny at less -- skinnyatlas. one of the problems we have seen in the wake of these questions, rules that were rightly intended for large banks, rightly intended to realistically value their assets, having a consequence that no one intended, basically that there was much less savings. what we have seen in the big business sector, we have had to bankroll our suppliers to make sure that they had access to capital. getting small business access to

capital is very important. ideally the best thing that could be done would be to give the banking sector workings of the private sector could provide the capital. those provisions we are talking about are the so-called mark to market provisions. until that can happen, until the system is working, we have proposed $30 million to be projected, that would be helpful, but a stop-gap measure. host: john castellani, the hope -- the president of the business roundtable, representing more than 12 million companies and generating $6 trillion in annual revenues, combined making about one-third of the total value of u.s. stock market. what are some of the ceo's represented in the round table? guest: caterpillar, verizon,

general electric, microsoft. everything from the manufacturing sector to the high-tech sector. host: have you ever been in a ceo yourself? -- have you ever been a ceo yourself? guest: i have not. host: next caller. caller: kudos to c-span, where would we be without you guys? barack obama spoke out very aggressively against capitalism, liberation theology being a belief that poverty is caused by sen. and that the assessment for the blame of the sin is not on the sinners, like drug addiction or alcoholism, the blame is placed squarely on capitalism.

so, when barack obama goes to a business roundtable talking about how he is for free enterprise, i have grave doubts. take a look at the fact that since barack obama entered this little town, you have seen 30% in one year of the private business taken over by the federal government. another 18%, half of the private business in america taken over by the federal government. that is not america and not what this country is. when you roll into an economic downturn, you have one of two choices. even throw the money out to the people, who restart the economic engine. george bush did that when we

inherited the recession from the bubble burst out of of after thm crash. the hyenas on capitol hill take control of the people, that is what is happening here, and i take everything that barack obama says with an entire bag of salt. guest: private sector is where jobs are created, creating lasting jobs beyond what any government can do. one of the things we have been stressing of particular importance is that what drives us is the man for our product and services. we do not make your own demand, the consumer has to be in the game. right now the consumer is very leary in the united states, as they should be.

there is something else going on in the world is different, we are seeing other countries, particularly india, china, brazil, and economies that are growing. we need access their to sell goods and services in those markets. this may be a recovery led by developing countries, but we need to address what the rest of the world is doing, getting into trade agreements with those countries that we can sell services to. something the president recognized, but i cannot be done by wishing it from washington. host: recently the administration announced that they want to rapidly increase -- guest: double. host: double the exports in five years.

how'd you get the market behind it? guest: you cannot judgeships things and hope that they will buy it, you have to be able to reduce tariffs, invest in those markets so that it can be serviced, finance, marketed around the world. that is what the rest of the world is doing, rapidly negotiating to open up markets while the u.s. has not been able to move forward. panama, colombia, giving the u.s. a tremendous advantage, important but small in the detail of the economy is. you cannot say they want to double exports without access into the markets or a tax code that supports being competitive around the world. host: since the obama administration has arrived, we

have a 30% takeover called in to that caller. -- takeover according to that caller. is that true? guest: know, to the support was payback for the way, and while there has obviously been significant investment by the government in the automotive industry, that will get turned around, that would be seven trillion dollars in the economy. host: jean, democratic line, go ahead. caller: business would not exist in this country if we did not have government. corporations, they exist for the

bottom line. they would wind up eating their own. which is pretty much what we have seen in the course of the last 30 years with mergers and acquisitions, creations of monopolies. as far as our tax code go, people rant and rave about having the highest rates, but the truth of it is that i am the only one paying that 35%, and others like me, stuck in my tax bracket. corporations' offshore take their profits and pay virtually nothing about 35%. yes, most of our jobs come from small businesses. corporations have been squeezing. reduction is not the problem. i think you will agree. the american worker, which you

can the republican party feel nothing but disdain for, are now doing the job of three, with lower wages compared to what they had 30 years ago. host: we will get a response. guest: three - things, and it is important to make these points, first and foremost yes, there is a legitimate role for government. we need good regulation and smart regulation for the markets. we need the security that the government provides. no one is asking for the government to disappear, we want the government to be here and be efficient and the vet bill. secondly, american workers can compete anywhere in the world. they are the best educated got with it the best resources. we think that we can compete anywhere in the world and we

have seen tremendous productivity and improvement. business roundtable companies employing 11 million workers? people do lose sight of this when they talk about trade and halifax the american workforce, there are 26 million jobs in the united states that depend on international trade, work for multinational can -- companies, more of them are participating çóin a worldwide market, finance theory and manufactured here. a worker that works for a company that is involved in the international marketplace makes 25% more than a worker that does not. the best paying jobs, the jobs that are growing, the jobs that we think we can grow in the future, we think it with the right set of rules the american people can compete anywhere.

host: the story this morning in "the times" is about "aging work force creates skills shortage for u.s. manufacturers." guest: this is one issue where democrats, republicans, they all agreed. i testified a couple of weeks ago along with my counterparts in business about the importance of revamping the school system so that we of workers that are better able to compete in the global marketplace. this administration and previous administrations have worked very hard to prove this case and we need to work to make sure that our teachers and students understand math and science, it is not just getting a degree in engineering or science, it is getting an associate's degree so that you can develop and

utilize your analytical skills. the thing that we are most concerned about is a shortage of workers, as well as the fact that we are not producing as many engineers and mathematicians from our colleges, something that is very concerning to everyone, both parties on both sides of pennsylvania avenue. host: garrett, in the and the line. go ahead. caller: am i on? guest: -- host: you are, go- ahead. caller: thank you for c-span. what are americans going to do as far as manufacturing? many of those jobs that are gone, textiles and automobiles,

what should we be concentrating on? guest: that goes to what we were just talking about. what we should be concentrating on are those businesses and activities that create value. those are the ones that create the highest-paid jobs in the future. manufacturing will be a part of it. we can manufacture in the united states. go to texas instruments plant and look at the technology being developed right here in the united states. go to a caterpillar plant or a dealer plant. we continue to manufacture high- technology in the united states. one of the keys for the future is to be able to design new

technology in this country. if you can design it here and make it here, you can sell at around the world. a combination of services and manufacturing, they will both be a part of the future, but we need to make sure that we have the high end of the value-added chain. host: rockford, illinois. go ahead with your comment. caller: the employment benefits, i had a question. should i sign up for public assistance emma host: the unemployment extension ran out yesterday. what is your administration's view on unemployment generally? and secondarily, jobs legislation?

guest: unfortunately the end insurance extension did run out yesterday, which, frankly, is the fault of congress. americans, who through no fault of their own, have not been able to find jobs and were laid off. hopefully congress will get to that quickly. that is important for people's needs. i hope that the caller has better news later in the week, clearly this is something i got caught up in a policy. the jobs bill, focusing on that, as i spoke about earlier, it has to be divided into what the public sector can do to create jobs and what the private sector should do. private-sector jobs of the ones that have been shown to was by history to be the longest lasting, the highest paid, and the most valuable for the economy. we need the kinds of rules and

policies that allow the private sector to be able to invest. that tax certainty, we need to expire those provisions, putting them on the playing field with our foreign competitors, which has been difficult. we have not been talking about financial regulatory reform, but we need our system to be modernized. those other kinds of things -- if we take those steps, it will allow the private sector to be able to invest in better jobs and create better jobs, and for the public sector to have its traditional role in creating those kinds of things. host: texas, max, democratic line. caller: thank you very much. i wanted to comment on health

care. the state that i lived in, most city the social security is paid for within come. this health care that is paid for down here, they pay their premiums and all that, and finally they do not have much left to live on. host: where you get your health care through? guest: -- caller: i am on medicare. host: do you have a pension? you mention social security. caller: they are barely sneaking by on this bill, to be honest with you.

i do none know where these polls are coming from, i do that sea of people will keep on living. host: we appreciate the call. caller: -- guest: health care costs, keep in mind what it is that we do, providing health care for every single one of our employees. some 35 million americans, this is the biggest single cost pressure for our ceo's every single year. three years ago the head of the aarp, the head of the national business association, and die, we all stood up to try to move the political system in the united states -- we still

believe that this reform is necessary. we have spent too much for too little in this country. . . guest: and we need medicare that works as well as medicaid that works. if we think that is achievable. the real tragedy is the politics of this unfortunate the circumstance has caused us to be

diverted away from what the country really needs, which is modernizing, and improving its health care delivery system and at the same time improving the quality. host: can you give us an average of what your company's paper employee? guest: and individual employer run somewhere between $10,000 if and $13,000. host: that the company is paying. guest: yes, and we should report recently that if nothing is done that cost will rise to nearly $30,000 in 10 years. that is unsustainable. we cannot compete around the world if we're going to face that kind of cost. the nation cannot afford it. the emphasis has to be on delivery system. yes, getting everyone covered, but if we cover everyone in the inefficient system that we have now, the whole country will not be able to afford it.

host: john castellani is with us until 9:15 a.m. eastern. president obama is speaking this morning about education. we will cover that live just after 10:00 or so, and education event with colin powell. next call is from david on the independent line, good morning. david ahman going to put you on hold. i your feedback there. we will come back to you. let's move on to florida, republican line. caller: i call in two or three times a year and i have for the past 15 years trying to explain that you cannot fix health care until you fix the tax system. everybody admits it, and neither party will deal with it. if you believe that 70,000 pages

of tax code and a $350 billion to $400 billion a year spent in tax trying to comply for the tax code, you can do these programs. until our country falls, we will not change it. but we have got to fix the tax code. host: is your view on the tax go? guest: -- host: what is your view on the tax code? guest: the caller is right. it inhibits economic activity. it is the and competitive around the world -- counterattack -- competitive around the world. the caller is actually right. the we have the second highest

corporate worth they do not pay taxes. whether it is the statutory rate or the effective rate, the united states unfortunately leads the world in taking money out of our system that could otherwise go for investment and job creation. it is too complicated. it sends the wrong signals. the caller is absolutely right. we need to reform it and i hope we are able to sunday. host: is it as complex for business as it is for individuals? it is guest: more complex. most businesses go for five or six years with the irs before they can even close out their tax returns. host: 41 particular year? guest: 41 particular year. -- host: for one two particular year? guest: for one to give their

year. if an individual pays for their own health insurance, it is not tax deductible. we believe that individuals and corporations ought to be treated the same way. incentivizes one group and does incentivizes the other. host: next on health care. caller: in canada, it is a parliamentary government, socialism. the canadian government takes care of the health care for the people. they're running headlong into most of the socialist country -- countries in europe, canada, australia, new zealand.

the insurance companies are saying, let's give them a choice, they can go with blue cross or go with insurance companies and be competitive. but the act in 1945 made by congress made the insurance companies a monopoly. they could not take care of floods or earthquakes if they were not a monopoly. the answer is right there, you do not need insurance companies write their charging a small business. why don't we have insurance like canada or in europe? guest: the question is a good one and that is something that the nation has faced several times, that ayííir should we scp the private health care system and move to a nationalized

health care system, a so-called single payer system like they have in canada and many nations around the world? america is unique because for all of the faults in our health- care system is still the best in the world. it is still were people all are run the world come to when they are very sick and want the best treatment. what we need to find is that ability to cover everybody, but keep that kind of innovation and quality that is made -- not for everybody, but the best health care system in the world. the insurance companies really provide us with a tremendous benefit. we use insurance companies to manm" our health care systems. they are a repository of a lot of data. they have a a capability to do what we do not want to do as a company, that is, manage all the claims and organize all the coverage for our employees and our families.

the caller is right in terms of the market. in a lot of places in this country you have a choice of one health insurance company. one thing we have called for is a change in that market so that there is a national market, so that there is competition everywhere in the united states so that individuals and a a big business -- big business now when we go out to get insurance for our families, we have a 14 companies to choose from. if you are an individual in california or florida, you may have one or two. we have called for exchanges were you can create markets outside of state boundaries as they exist right now and get more competition, more choice for the individual and for small business. host: when this -- when the president spoke last week, he

also addressed the financial industry more broadly. i want to show you some of his comments. >> most americans, including myself, do not begrudge reasonable rewards for a job well done. what has outraged people is a of bonusesñi and -- is in bonuses t firms that have required recent assistance. believe it is appropriate for the government to be in the business of setting compensation levels. i do believe the government to have a say in the incentive package and i do believe i should be based on long-term profits. and particularly in the financial industry. host: what do we hear there that guest: compensation ought toj

perform -- reward long- term performance. first and foremost it should be balanced. it should be focused on results. it should not emphasize the long term or the short term too much. it should not rely on one vehicle, cash, or stock options. it to be diversified. it should not reward failure. and should be appropriately sized. we think compensation should be determined by those independent directors, those compensation committees that have no ties to the company that are elected by the shareholders. and give them the right to both said the compensation, make sure it is transparent, make sure it is understandable, and make sure

is appropriate. ñiit should be based on long-tem results. it should be appropriate and the government to adopt the involved in setting it. it is what the shareholders should do. host: a couple more calls for you. tony, on the democrats line in new jersey. caller: if you would google a word called "ad busters" a group in canada that exposes a lot of corporate shenanigans. has anyone done a study about the man working on line verses the ceo and how that has changed since the '60s? i believe it has gone out of

work. you can blame this or that, but agreed is a major part of the whole problem. and anyone who believes that it is appropriate to make a huge profit off of suffering, because that is what all health care corporations are doing, they're creating profit off of suffering. guest: there are a couple of issues that you have there. let me reiterate, we think compensation should be set by independent directors representing the shareholders. if should be balanced, transparent, and reward results. we cannot say what one person at one company should make compared to another company. it is really needing to be set by the market and as independent directors and was appropriate for that company at that time. 1 then we have been doing it over the lost 12 months -- one thing we have been doing in the

last 12 months is vilifying the health insurance industry. the health insurance industry, health care delivery system, what we are talking about pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, if they have an important role to play in developing -- in delivering high-quality health care to the american people. instead of vilifying the health, insurance companies, we need to look at what works. the same person who would stand up and say they are doing some the wrong is dependent upon this country -- these companies for their life or someone they loved life -- someone's life they loved. we have a system that is fundamentally broken. we pay for activity, not results.

we do not have ever won in the system so that when someone comes in without insurance into a hospital room, they cannot get any more money out of the government. the shift those costs to those of us who pay. again, everyone of the 35 million americans that are associated with our companies get health insurance. we are paying for it. we want to bring the costs down and improve quality. host: mike is going in from raleigh, north carolina. caller: back when mr. obama and congress were giving away all of this money, if they would have given it to the big corporations in the trickle-down effect, if they had come out with some kind of voucher to people -- like in my case, i do not need to pay off my home, but if you give me a doctor to buy a new american

aid car, or give people a voucher to add to their home, or their farm equipment or upgrade their housing, you know, giving the money to the actual people who would spend it an instead of giving it to these corporations who have these bonuses for their ceos that we hear about. host: thanks, mike. it would using about -- what you think about what he is saying? guest: if the economy is going to grow for the longñi term, we need to create private-sector jobs. the caller is right in the long term in the the long-term demand is for products and services. we do use the tax code to help

do some of the things that he suggested be done in vouchers. there is a home buyers tax creditñiñi that provides $8,500r a first-time home buyer. it is for a limited time. there are tax credits for the cash for clunkers program. it is a limited effect. the better long-term effect is to get demand. the caller is absolutely right. what drives this economy is demand for goods and services. to have that demand we have to have money in the consumer product. host: an e-mail from new jersey -- guest: corporations do pass the savings along to consumers. that is was going on to the productivity increases across the country. in fact, around the world.

there is not a lot of pricing leverage around the world. i know some things go up and down from time to time, but there are not a lot of products that you can turn to and say, that is a raise in the price of a product. the what is happening is that the consumer is looking for a greater oregon. the pressure on companies is to reduce their cost -- is looking for a greater bargain. the pressure on companies is to reduce their cost. theñi price index and consumer price index have been very stable. host: jon castle lake and business roundtable. thanks for joining us. in a moment, we will look at medicare and will speak with dr. cecil wilson, the incoming

president of the american medical association. but first, a look at news from c-span radio. >> the commerce department report that personal spending jumped by a larger amount than expected in january, but americans' incomes barely budged. the income gain was the weakest showing in four months, raising concerns about whether consumers can spend enough to support an economic rebound. united nations humanitarian spokeswoman says it will rush aid deliveries to chile, two days after the 8.8 magnitude earthquake struck about 2 1/3 miles from the capital of santiago, -- 200 miles from the capital of santiago, killing to wonder people. -- killing several hundred people.

toyota president in a news conference earlier apologize to the company's customers in china. he says the country is an important market for the car company. it was mr. toyoda's second for an appearance following last week's appearance in washington. consumer reports is returning eight petrova models to their recommended thlist. honda and the subaru are tied for first. toyota is once again #3 on the list. >> today, part 2 of a hearing on a construction contracts in afghanistan. the u.s. agency for international kohlman talk

about interagency coordination and a proposed new government oversight agency to reduce waste and fraud. that is live at 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span2. today, house majority leader steny hoyer, talks about the recently created bipartisan fiscal commission, charged with reducing the federal deficit. that is live here on c-span at 1:00 p.m. >> which four presidents lived past 90 years old. john adams, herbert hoover, ronald reagan, and gerald ford. find these in c-span is newly updated book "who is buried in grant's tomb?" >> it is a new biography of each

of these presidents and you can tell a lot about people by the end of their lives. >> now available at your favorite bookseller, or give a 25% discount at the publisher's web site publicaffairs knows based books.com. host: dr. cecil wilson is the incoming president of the american medical association, joining us this morning to talk about medicare cuts to physicians reimbursement and of care more broadly. the news media had a piece over the weekend that " you that says groups seem to be exasperated by the laporta about whether congress will not make permanent action -- if bu

they quote you as saying there is no clue as to what congress is doing. congress is dealing with politics while letting rome burned and not protecting seniors and military, all of whom depend on medicare and try care. what is going on here? guest: first, thank you for having me, and i would stand by that last ". -- that last statement. we have leaders coming to washington to tell congress to meet their responsibility for the medicare program, which provides care for seniors and military families. the senate adjourned on friday without providing a 20% -- 21% cut in medicare payments.

as of today, there is ia 21% cut in medicare payments, which i would say courts seniors and military families at risk of decreased access to care. host: if you have procedures in the next couple of days it does not make sense to follow through with those procedures if the payment cut is going to be in effect stil. guest: physicians are not going to be turning their patients away. the reality is that although these cuts will are in effect now, the answer will not be immediate. they will delay processing insurance claims for 10 business days in hopes that congress will repair the damage and block the cuts. patients who go to their

physicians to they can count on them seeing them. the concern is that in the long term, and even in the immediate term, physicians cannot maintain their practice, cannot pay the bills with these kinds of cuts. there will have to look at this program that is no longer reliable for physicians or patients and make decisions about and whether they can continue to see medicare patients. host: dr. wilson is here to talk to was about medicaid and medicare and health care more broadly. we will get to your calls momentarily. john mccain yesterday on the "meet the press" has an idea on how to fix it. i want to read this to you on the verge of a procedural fight over health care.

democrats are trying to get hundreds of millions of dollars for their of karen -- health care bill. guest: people are hurting and they will continue to work. so what we are saying is get it right, and get it done. to continue to postpone this solution, that is, to get rid of this of egregious formula that results in that threatened cuts or threatened -- in cuts or threaten to kecoughtan -- the results in cuts or threatened

cuts. host: for the typical internist, how much of their pay is medicare or medicaid? guest: depends on where you are. about one-third of mine is medicare patients. given where you are, that could mean two-thirds of your patience in any given day or medicare patients. this sort of problem challenges my ability and the ability of fish -- positions in general is a very -- that challenges my ability and the ability of physicians in general is a very important problem. ahoy we are angry about it. host: first call for dr. wilson, north carolina. caller: we gave the democrats a

majority to pass this. and i want to put the blame directly on those two congress people, one lady from louisiana and i think there was another one from missouri or somewhere, the democrats i could not get on board. -- the democrats that could not get on board. this really frustrated the american people. this is something that democrats should look at. they need to come together more in their party. some of these people, they say they're democrats, but i think they have really infiltrated the party. but i wanted to say to the gentleman -- i know he is a doctor. i do not understand why when you go to the hospital, why would it cost me? ñri am a disabled veteran.

they paid some bills for me. host: duke get your bills covered through try care? caller: no, through -- do you get your bills covered through tricare? caller: no, the through the v.a.. what a hospital was trying to charge me was something like $1,200. when the va paid it was only like $300 or something puritans -- or something. sometimes i try to read the receipts and it is mind- boggling. host: get a response from dr. wilson. guest: you have illustrated in very graphic terms the fact that the system is not working well for you. and i can tell you it is not working well for people around

the country. that is the message to congress. in regard to congress, there is plenty of blame to go around. what we are suggesting from ama is, let's focus on some things -- let's get rid of the partisan bickering and make this a better system. host: north carolina, republican collar. caller: i have not heard anything about deductibles. my husband works at a small auto dealership and when he first start of their about 10 years ago, our deductible at the time with blue cross blue shield was $1,000. now it is up to $4,000. i'm wondering if this bill passes, what is it going toçó do to deductibles?

guest: actually, the reality is that if nothing is done to the health system, things like that will continue to be more of a problem. what we are seeing is the cost of a health care in this country continues to accelerate. 1.4 trillion dollars this year, ended another 10 years, 4.4 trillion dollars. as the cost of insurance increases, employers and others are finding that to continue to provide insurance, they're having to have patience be resolved before an increasing cost of that. it works out to be increases in deductibles and a case. that is just -- and copays. that is just another indication that we cannot keep putting it off. host: in the four corners new

mexico, billy on the independent line. caller: my mother is in her eighties and in the last four years i have had to find at least four different primary doctors for her. they have either gone to new york or gone back into specialty or gone to the south pacific islands. and one just quit. host: what is behind them leaving? çócaller: what is the reason? a about 10 years ago i was comingñr out of an eye doctor's office in the colorado areañiçód i ask his secretaryñiçó --ñr sh, however are you going to pay for this and i said, what difference does it make? she said, ifñ2hváu have medicar, and you'll get -- we will get $13 for this. if it is blue cross, about 45

days. ifñi you have medicare, it wille at least $990 days and will get $13. blue cross will be about $40. i can remember what the other one would pay. -- cannot remember what the other one would pay. but the time line was that all ñrof them were late. it was not a 30 day turnover. host: the flight of doctors from her area, have you seen that? guest: for the lost nine years, medicare payments to this -- to physicians have not changed. they're theñr sameçóñr now as te were nine years ago, and the cost of providing that care has gone up 20% in that time. physicians are finding that they cannot continue to provideçmkçór care, to do early primary care physicians. ñiçó--ñi particularly primary ce

physicians. ñiñinearly one-fourth of seniore finding that when they're looking for a primaryñi care physician they have trouble finding one. ñrxdthe thing that makes itçó en ñiñiçóworse where you are -- any ì+ corners rma wereñr not many people live, but what makes it worse in areas like that, there may only be one or two primary- care physicians in the area. if they find they can no longer continue to practice there, then you have not had a decrease in access, but you have care got out the window. ñiñrseniors need to be calling their senators to say this has got to stop. you have a responsibility to fund this program. something needs to be done and it needs to be permanent. let me just segue from that to remind viewers that the rea'r5ì+

we get in this trouble each year is that we have a medicare payment form euphemistically called a sustainable growth rate. as long as we have that formula, each year there will be cuts unless congress passes a law and each year. that is no way to run a program on which so many citizens and military families rely upon. host: dr. wilson is the incoming president of the american medical association. he will take over in june. he is a former flight commander in the u.s. navy. good morning to charles in north -- south carolina, democrats line. caller: what is the average wage of your members? how much does a standard visit

to the doctor's office cost? because i have never seen any court doctors. and i would like to know if you are in favor of tort reform. and is europe liability insurance tax deductible as a cost to doing business at the end of the year? guest: those are important questions. i'm going to assume that you ñisaid the average weight of our members -- ñihost: i think he said wage. guest: let meú&1eñrñi thatñi ds toçó occupy a privileged positin in this society. if we are most appreciative of that. ñipeoploueááq)vicesñi that physicians --ñi people value the servicesñr that physicians provide. physicians are by and large

small businesses. if you have a small business and your income continues to state the same, or your threatened with cuts, then that part of that business with medicare, you haveñjr to look up and say, cani continue to keep the lights on, to hire employees, to invest in a command? those are -- in equipment? those are hard decisions to talk to make. that is what we are facingñiñ;wh in medicare programñi that is nt covering theñi cost of providing care. host: whatçó about the average costñr of a standard visit in te country? guest: i think a fair observation is there is not a standard cost. there is such a variety of things that we do to provide care that it is not a number that is available and would mean anything.

host: he asked lastly about the ama's view on tort reform. guest: the tort system does not serve ourñr country well. it does not assure that people who have been injured get compensation.  in an appropriate and fair and expeditiousñrñi way. encourages a jackpot conductñi justice whereçó people fileçó claims and hopes that they can ñiñrñiwin the jackpot. what we know our thatbuuár)ds ñiñrof claims4q are broad are actually filed in court because ofi]ñrçóçsñi thoseñr eym1ññi 90o award. ñrand the courts are being clubd by a system that is not serving uyi well, your patience or physicians. -- ñineither patients nor physicians. ñrñrwe're calling on congress ad

the president to include that as a part of healthñiñi reform. umçó host:ñi clinton township oe independent line. çójfcaller: i'm happy to hear d. wilson mentioned toward reform as an important part of the old process. ñiand my comment is that the ama is a bunch of talking heads for the government. ñrmy question is, in comparisono all of theñi doctors in the unid states, is in the american medicalçó associationñrñiñrçóñrk and howwçó close are you workig ÷ emmanuel, who believes in getting rid of the nonproductive people in order to

provide those -- provide for those who would benefit our society better? and guest: thank you, and sitting here has a talking head, it is hard for me to counter the part of your question. but let me say that the ama has principles for health system reform and we will work to support anyone who supports those principles. we believe they are important. assuring that the patient- physician relationship is secure, and working together. the medicare payment reform, medical liability reform, those are all critical. we are working with parties everywhere, and the white house as well as congress, whose support those principles. it is important to know that the ama is a nonpartisan organization. we have our interest revolving around what we think is important for patients and

physicians. let me also say that the ama is the largest medical association in this country. it gives the position at the center of the health system reform, a position of which we are proud. we will continue to push for these things that we think are important. host: want to get your thoughts on the president's proposed budget for medicare and medicaid for 2011. including that is sevener $22 million to detect fraud and waste. -- included in that is $722 million to detect fraud and waste. guest: let me take just a little

of that. first, we think that waste, fraud and abuse need to be rooted out. we need to enforce regulations and laws that are in effect. people abusing the system, we need to find that out and get rid of it. we would applaud the efforts to beef up that kind of effort. the other thing is to talk about medicare in particular, we were encouraged that in that budget part of those funds do address the problem of the flaw in the medicare payment formula. the president has included that money to try to address that and get rid of this whole that we are in with regard to medicare. with regard to medicaid, it has been grievously under funded. it has become an opera facility -- an impressively large part of the state's payment.

host: and states have been hit because of the economic downturn and they are not able to meet their obligations to medicaid? guest: they're finding it difficult to read any of their obligations. the reality is that opposed to the federal government, every state except one has to have a balanced budget. they cannot just write it off and they cannot borrow it. they have to come up with a balanced budget. health care for the states, medicaid, and medicaid is now competing with roads and highways and social services. host: belleview,çó ohio, maria and, good morning, independent. caller: i wanted to ask a question about her by professional midwives and the american medical association's denouncement of support for these midwives. it seems to me that people who are taking part in the medicaid system for the most part are

using berthing services in our state's, maybe not the majority, but i would assume that anecdotally they use it for the most part on those services. most states, including ohio, do not support professional services for these midwives, who have the same training and schooling as any registered nurse. there is physically trained to do berthing services in people's homes or in freestanding birthing centers. the state of washington allows the certified nurse midwives to operate in that state $3.1 million over a time frame of two years just using the program for save birds. host: -- that program for safe births.

host: we will get dr. wilson's reaction. guest: there is licensing in different states. what you'll find is that different states treat that licensing differently. in some states they allow things that they would not in other states. but the bigger part of that question that you put forward is, how do we decide what is the best health care for patients and who best to provide that care? as we increasingly look at the cost of the care, we look of the complexities of medical care and we are saying is that there are some jobs that some professionals do that others may do if they have adequate training. at the end, the important thing is what is safe for the patient? whoever is providing the trick -- that care, but the safety of the patient is the utmost.

we have -- we need to look at the scope of practice, look at the education to be sure that people are licensed to do what they're qualified to do. host: rebecca in texas, democrats line. caller: i'm a retired principal from texas and we were not allowed to participate with the social security. therefore, we were state employees and with the texas retirement system. but when i became 65, at the ataetna -- aetna in for me they were not going to be part of my medical program, and encouraged me to join medicare because they were not going to cover me. they were liquid to cover the 20% that medicare does not pay. -- they were only going to cover

the 20% of medicare does not pay. now i am paying for medicare because i'm not a social security person because they did not allow us to join social security. we just put into our texas retirement system. therefore, i am paying more premium with ednaetna and less coverage now with medicare and i think we need to have insurance reform. insurance companies are pretty much doing what they please. guest: i would echo your remarks about insurance reform and that is an important part of health system reform. and first of all, thank you for what you have done as an educator. we're the better for it and i appreciate the of life of service. we do need the reform of insurance as well as governmental programs. it is not simple.

and i know that you know that. it is not as simple as just saying, medicare could take over everything, or medicaid for that matter as well. both of those programs at the present time are underfunded, are not working. the main reason is that leaders are here in washington this week is to talk about the fact that congress is not funding medicare. they need to step up to that responsibility. we need to improve all of these programs. what we need for america is a system that is uniquely american, nerol private nor all public, not a single payer -- neater all private nor all public, not a single payer system. we need to fix the system because it is broken. host: charles on the line from reno, nevada.

caller: i think you described why things keep going up, but you did not really tell us what this new bill the democrats are proposing -- how would would affect deductibles. i have insurance. it keeps going up every year. i do not know how the new bill is going to affect my insurance. guest: that is an important question and would you have described is the people who walk -- who have insurance now are afraid of losing it. those who do not have it are obviously afraid that they will never have added. what will it -- never have it. what we will expect is that in the new system, there will be a creation of these so-called exchanges and there will be a better product, a cost- effective, high-quality product that through a competitive system will result in

improvements. but you have also struck upon another important thing and that is, health care reform, if we just put reform and government insurance in place and do not address the rising health-care costs, we will continue to be in a world of hurt. we need to look at providing the right care to the right patient at the right time. looking at in a grid. missions to hospitals, dealing with the problem of medicine and the medical liability for. it is doing thing to -- is doing things to control these costs so the problem of losing their insurance because companies can no longer afford to provide it, or people not be able to afford to pay their deductibles and their copays because the company is not providing those as well, there is the urgency that says let's not keep postponing health system reform.

we have actually been at this for about 100 years off and on. the problems that you describe are only going to get worse if nothing is done. we need to do something about it. host: the physician reimbursements that have been held up in the senate, mary carmichael was blogging on "newsweek" last week -- it now has three options, to further cut again, the lead it, decide never to make it, or to do nothing as the cuts get made. in which case, there will be a lot of angry doctors and a lot of angry seniors as well. legislatively, what needs to happen to give us a temporary fixñr to this problem? ñiñie1guest: first of all, thera lot of doctors in town this week. our top leaders around the country are in town. and the blog that you just

described, our phone lines and e-mails have been clocked over the weekend because of this lack of responsibility, this dereliction of duty that the senate has allowed this cut to go through. what we have said is the time is over for fixes, for band-aids. at the time now is for a permanent fix. you need to get this formula and block the cuts and pay the cost of care going forward. back inxd november, the house of representatives passed a bill 3961 that would do all of those things. we're saying to the senate, you need to do the same. ñjrçóñi

the cuts in medicare have nothing to do with the health reform bill. these are cuts that relate to current law because we have this formula that we have that i described, the sgr. that is not a part ofñi the heah system reform. in your references to the health care advantage have to do with the fact that some of the legislation in the house and in the senate, in looking at how to pay for health system reform, have said that medicare advantage now pays 14% higher than other medicare. that bonus for medicare advantage needs to be phased out and that money can be used to be brought -- to provide care for everyone. it is a fairness issue that says the government shall not pay more for one medicare patient because they are on a certain plan than they do for another medicare patient whitman -- with conventional medicare.

that is part of that comes from. the apartment about -- the fact that if you have more people injured, the hospital -- the other part of its comes from the fact that if you have more people insured the hospital is able to work more effectively. host: next call from new mexico. caller: if you get the issue of malpractice, a lot of suggestions have beenñr made in the area of tort reform. why don't we have more suggestions in the entire area of malpractice reform? tort reform in particular, the proposals have been to limit damages due to pain and suffering, which is proportionally discriminates against children and seniors. but when we talk about malpractice, we have a broad

area where we have the physicians and needing to reduce the amount of malpractice. we have physicians insurers, patient insurers, and yet, the proposals have been in most cases to limit the damages to the least among them. what i would like to see -- and why doesn't the ama back proposals or make proposals that would significantly reduce the amount of malpractice in the first place? guest: the answer is that any malpractice is too much. we believe that when that occurs and patients are injured, they need to be compensated. we're not talking about that. we're talking about those nine meritorious cases where -- those

non-meritorious cases. let me make it clear. we are not talking about in any way limiting damages to people who have been injured. we believe they should be compensated for all medical care, all lost wages, anything that is measurable. the limits to cast on non- economic damages is usually called "pain and suffering" and we believe there should be some compensation within reasonable limits. the problem is -- and i'm glad you brought this up -- that increasing cost for liability of physicians, but more important, the threat of being hauled into court because you did not order that one extra test or procedure has resulted in physicians ordering some tests that may be did not need to be ordered --

what we called defensive medicine -- and that is adding to the cost of health care in this country. it needs to be controlled. one way is to put caps on economic damages and also on contingency fees. we know in states like california, texas, louisiana, they have worked to control those costs. but it has not changed the tort system. we're also looking at other measures that would change the system. so that courts are not clogged up with non-meritorious cases, things were you have experts making determinations, certification for experts that say this case has merit. evidence should be admissible in court when they are called into court also. we believe those kinds of

changes in the system will ultimately make improvements in this problem we have with the -- defensive medicine. host: we will hear from the president in just a bit. dr. cecil wilson is with us for the next few minutes. president obama is speaking this morning about education, offering $900 million to -- in grants to states and school districts. we will take you there live in just a couple of minutes once it gets under way. first, new haven, conn., anthony on the independent line. caller: good morning, bill, good morning, dr. wilson. medicare part "c" which is the advantage plan, does that take a lot out of medicare that was

passed in 1997? the other part is the waste, fraud, and abuse in medicare, which i see a lot -- could you speak to the c-span viewers about this? guest: thank you for emphasizing the point about medicare a bandage. we are not supporting taking medical care away from any senior citizens. the benefits of medicare advantage will not change. but what we are saying is that this bonus, this extra 14% debt is paid for managed-care plans that was put in place back in the mid-90s, that is just unfair to pay for some patients and not others. we think is important -- it is important that it be equalized as a part of this. host: riverside, calif., r,