affected, and which have not? as u.s. assistance helped the support for the moderate palestinians, a goal that all of us support? and what role do they play in helping to strengthen the governing institutions in the west bank? are we making a positive impact. >> we thank you for those comments with respect to haiti, and gossip, and the west bank. we do have, as i have said before, a very rigorous system for tracking any cast -- any cash and on the partner bedding, we have a sophisticated system in place that is tracking the names of all of the partners, with all of the key personnel. this is against a larger data base. and we will follow up on anything positive that happens

in the tracking system. then we have an aggressive process of investigation and review, before we go forward. this is a very robust system. we are also attracting any unauthorized disbursements, and we transfer resources through this, with the banking accounts into a special treasury account in a palestinian bank. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] a palestinian bank and then monitor all flows out of that account by every single disbursement being track specifically to its end-use. most of these disbursements, all of these disbursements are used to pay off creditors as soon as those resources go back out to other places. the question with respect to how are we coordinating with other partners and what can we do to improve effectiveness, i will just say i spoke to john holmes before he went to make the point you are making better goal is

about effectiveness in that environment and that we need to look at the whole picture. it is the prm program that primarily partners with unra and not usaid although we believe that is an important partnership going forward. we will continue to have the safeguards in place. on effectiveness, there is some areas we think have been more effective than others, health and education and perhaps more effective than some full portfolio of infrastructure investments, although there have been some success stories there as well in the west bank in particular. in gaza with mostly humanitarian missions, it is a different operating environment. >> the time of the gentleman has expired and an impressive and-- impressive show of efficiency of time mr. conway, 45 seconds after entering the room is recognized for five minutes of questioning. >> thank you mr. chairman. i'm sorry i'm late that we had a

weekly breakfast meeting with the speaker and it went a little bit over so i'm pleased to-- dr. shah for allowing me to come in late and allowing me to continue nonetheless. dr. shah, what one of the concerns i certainly have a 90 other members of the committee do as well as that in some ways usaid has been hollowed out in the last decade. and, i would hope that part of your mission is to turn that around. he had secretary clinton here in her first appearance before the committee. she has been here since, who is certainly committed to doing that but we have seen for example a proliferation of age-related missions that are not however part of usaid. the millennial project in the aids project and on and on. i would even argue that an awful lot of sort of funds that are used by the military in

afghanistan and iraq are to be projects managed by our military and hopefully well, but those are so substantial, one is concerned about what could go wrong. may be preferably we would have them in the hands of professionals. i wonder if you could address that whole question of how do we consolidate, how do we make sure you are the go-to person for bilateral and multilateral assistance and we make any i.d. into a cutting edge development agency that actually does something and isn't just a place that facilitates contracts with others? >> thank you very much for that comment and that statement. i believe that right now is an incredibly unique time to seize the opportunity. we have a president and secretary and administrator completely committed to that goal and we have such strong

leadership and support in the congressional committees and in congress to achieve that outcome. i also believe development is a discipline and i think it is a professional mull discipline that has the needs to benefit constantly from the learnings of the past and the learning learnings of the present and we need to represent excellence in the practice of that discipline on behalf of all development activities. our game plan for reestablishing our effectiveness in their transparency and their accountability and our operational excellence it's really to focus on a handful of strategic priorities. we will focus work in afghanistan and pakistan and try to show clear results against clear strategic metrics. in haiti and our series of key issues like health, food security and climate change. in each of these areas usaid can show through restructuring how we do our work that we can have more impact for less, that we can serve as a whole of government platform that invites and other partners in a matter--

manner directed against specific outcomes and makes tough choices about how we use resources so we get the most bang for the buck and are spending as we have tried to do with the relief effort around haiti. we are also pursuing a set of operational improvements and i want to thank the congress for its leadership in allowing us to have the development leadership initiative and rebuild the actual warren service corps which you are right to point out has been decimated over the past 15 years. we think we have a strong position. we have more than 4000 servers nationals that represent people with ph.d.'s and medical degrees and are entirely capable leaders that any other private company would think of is a tremendous as a tremendous core asset for a more globally impacted world. we need to rebuild our foreign service. we are doing at the midcareer technical level and do the dli. >> if i may interrupt you, count me as an ally in that effort. believe development agency as far as i'm concerned as has to

be usaid not the state department. you are the hands-on guys, you are the people with experience and you just enumerated that in that is what we have to work with. in my 49 seconds left one thing i want to put in your cab usaid does provide funding to andy i do various bigots. one of the concerns i have had about their work is the modernization works from the bottom up and not the top down. i would like to see a much enhanced effort at working with the local governance in those programs. quite frankly i think we haven't done such a good job over the years and doing that. we have tried but it is a hard mechanism but they are going to take the lead from where the money flows and i would hope you take a look at that. if we really mean it about democratization the place you build that is at the local level. thank you mr. chairman. my time is up. >> the gentleman's time has expired and i thank him for

echoing some of my sentiments on these issues, and an unusual occurrence. and, given the time, if it is all right with you i'm going to recognize myself-- no, i am sorry, mr. rohrabacher is here. you are next mr. rohrabacher. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you mr. chairman. how much aid have we provided to afghanistan since 2001? >> i am not sure the precise number since 2001. >> how much have we provided this year? >> this year we are proposing in the fy2011 budget that we would be spending 3.9 billion dollars,

and that is down from 4.4 billion in 2010 when you include the supplemental amount with the inactive amount. >> okay, and how much will we be providing iraq? >> i believe that is going down as well from $700 million to $400 million but i will doublecheck those numbers for you. >> so iraq-- what are some of the programs we are spending 400 million for in iraq? >> which programs are priorities in iraq? our immediate priority is support for the elections and successfully completing the elections and we are also supporting the potential government transitions and ministries who support contracts that will work in the aftermath, currently up and running but will continue through that critical or to six months. back after the election and in addition to that we have a number of programs in health and education, economics and

agriculture in particular. >> do you have the figures with you in terms of how much we have spent, how much aid has been spent in iraq since the liberation? >> i am not--.at my fingertips t i will follow-up on that. >> maybe you can tell us of the almost $4 billion, $3.9 billion that will be spent in afghanistan what are some of the programs that afghanistan will be receiving? >> sure. have restructured our afghanistan portfolio to be aligned with and very much a part of the president afghanistan strategy. we had two major strategic reviews in march of last year and then december when the president strategy was announced by the president. the priorities going forward are agriculture, which is the largest employer of individuals outside of the government in afghanistan.

our investments investments they are have peaked this year at around $820 million and will come down to $425 million in the 2011 spending but that continued pipeline of investment will be the single greatest investment in growth activity sectors in agriculture and we are encouraged by some of the early outcomes with respect to performance in that sector. we also have major investments in both continue with major investments in health and education. the health sector is a sector we are partnering with the ministry of health. it has been a number of years in the making to develop a robust partnership with strong auditing trails and financial accountability for our spending and our priorities are on building an effective tertiary old system and primary health system and getting health access out into the rural areas to serve the needs of women and children in particular to most effectively reduce some of the disproportionate health arms in

that context. we have a broader range of activities in partnership with other departments in the state department that include security, rule of law and counternarcotics but the aid administered programs will focus in the areas i describe. other economic growth priorities include roads and power as well. >> have we had-- how much did you say is being spent on agriculture? >> fy2010, when you include the supplemental is around 820 and the fy2011 request is around 425 that is agriculture and food security, and including alternative livelihoods in rural communities, not including counternarcotic activities. >> could you give us an example of some of the agricultural spending that we have gotten? >> we have programs-- first we work in partnership with the u.s. department of agriculture providing technical support to

the ministries and the public sector and we are very focused on supporting the private sector. we have farmers support programs that are getting seed and fertilizer out to farmers to read voucher-based private sector system. we have programs to help farmers produce high-value products like apples and then export them in the region so they have sources of cash and income in addition to the reduction of basic foodstuffs and they are working to develop improved access to agricultural credit though that farmers can support their own pathway out of poverty through development. >> thank you very much mr. chairman. >> i am going to recognize myself for three minutes and mr. smith for three minutes and i just want to follow-up a little more specifically on some of the points raised by my colleague from virginia. in the context of what the secretary is referring to as a

key foreign-policy priority, that is development and rebuilding usaid as an institution, specifically could you talk about the restoration of a budget development capacity and a policy planning capacity within a.i.d. and also in the rebuilding of the staff with the goal of doubling the number of foreign service officers through the development leadership initiative, you are priorities for hiring and we have a strong effort underway through the qddr to partner some of our new staff with members of the f bureau to identify really a revised and improved budget process to allow them to be accountable for the resources it spends.

it says it goes without saying in order to be the premiere agency we have to be able to account for our spending and be held to account for resources spent in a transparent and clear manner. so we're actively working on that through process ease. >> what about on the impact of developing the accountability is very important, but the question is rupp hand ad budget or do you get to develop a budge set in >> we will get to a place where we have the opportunity to develop a budget and working in partnership with others. but we clearly need to be able to make strategic resource tradeoff in order to be held accountable for the performance of the agency. >> on policy planning similarly, sir, we are building an active policy planning capacity, and i'm pleased to announce we have had real

leaders in the field like lavin who just joined our team. we hope to have a world-class innovate innovation capacity that helps us learn from text messaging through a range of other efforts to do randomized control trials to understand the impact of our work and rebuild our policy land planning and evaluation capacities. impact of our work most effectively and rebuild their policy planning and evaluation capacities. on staff, we have hired 420 individuals do to a dli. we respect the leadership congress has provided. my prayers are to be look at how we do deployment in more rapidly deploy the visuals to our poor strategic operational priority since shorten the length of time that they are and current training program. >> my time is expired. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for three minutes. >> thank you very much.

dr. shah as you know w.h.o. estimates that health care in africa is provided by faith-based organizations. the catholic health care alone in africa constitutes about 40%. we know a number of other groups , world vision and others are doing yeoman's warfare. they provide expertise infrastructure trust to the people and an enormous number of volunteers that otherwise might not be fair and their ability to expand its incredible. what is your view of increasing the partnership with faith-based organizations and ngo's especially as it relates to implementing the global health initiative? >> thank you for that observation. i believe the partnerships and bringing those partnerships into a whole health system construct will be critical to the effectiveness of the global health initiative so i would see whether it is in kenya or other countries where there are significant egg-based

organizations running hospitals and doing that work and where we are involved in providing support. our goal is to bring that support within the context of the health system and to make those more formally part of the integrated national health plan, so it absolutely involves expanding and deepening our partnership. >> i would hope you would be mindful that in some countries where church opposition to human rights abuses have been very strong. when integrated in partnerships and are formed in the government, health ministries and others might be less quick to want to embrace the faith-based community. i would hope that they would play a very positive role in suggesting when it comes to health care, you want the maximum impact certainly and it seems to me, i know places and i have been throughout africa. usually when there is corruption or human rights abuse by a dictatorship or authoritarian regime, it is reflected in other

parts of that government when it comes to partnering, so they shun those partnerships in some instances so i would hope we would hope to overcome that. >> thank you. we will. >> finally and 40 in 40 seconds, and reading the micro-enterprise results reporting, i understand it is a real problem with meeting to 50% goal for providing microfinancing to the poorest of the poor. could you take a second look at how we might be able to reach out to those ngo's that are actually meeting-- we headed by -- big fight and i know because that was my bill and there was a lot of tugs and give-and-take, but when it comes to the ngo's that are there on the ground providing maximum benefit to the poorest of the poor, the goal is a real one and i think it is achievable so please take a second look at that. >> we will.

>> the time of the gentleman has expired, because of the service for our late colleague, congressman murtha we will adjourn the hearing and we thank you very much for being here. we look forward very enthusiastically to working with you in the future or co-markup tomorrow at 10:00, and the committee hearing is adjourned. thank you. >> in a few moments president obama encourages kong to pass health care reform and "washington journal" is live at 7:00 eastern. with eel take your calls on health care, financial service it's and the president's budget

request. >> a couple of live events to tell you about today on our companion network, c-span 3. the congressional oversight panel looks to aid citigroup. they include the chief executive officer. that's at 10:00 a.m. eastern. at 2:00 p.m. it's a hearing on next year's budget request for the transportation security administration with the acting tsa administrator testifying. president obama is calling for a final vote on health care legislation. say that starting over wouldn't work because of policy differences between rep cansd democrats. deafment leaders are reportedly considering using a senate procedure that would allow passage of the health care bill with a simple majority. the president spoke about the issue for 20 minutes.

[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states. thank you. thank you. please, everybody, have a seat. thank you for joining us today. i want to thank julie, barbara, roland and christopher standing behind me. figures, physician stapts and nurses who understand how important it is for us to make much-needed changes in our health care system. i want to thank all of you who are here today and especially

recognize two people who have been working tirelessly on this effort. my secretary of health and human services, kathleen civilya. [applause] >> as well as our quarterback for health reform out of the white house, nancy. [applause] we began our push to reform health insurance last march. in this room. with doctors and nurses who know the system best, so it's fitting to be joined by all of you as we bring this journey to a close. last thursday i spent seven hours at a summit where democrats and republicans engaged in a public and very

substantive discussion about health care. this meeting capped off a debate that began with a similar summit nearly one year ago. since then, every idea has been put on the table. every argument has been made. everything there is to say about health care has been said. [laughter] >> and just about everybody has said it. [laughter] >> so now's the time to make a decision. about how to finally reform health care so that it works. not justs for the insurance companies, but for america's families and america's businesses. now where both sides say they agree is that the status quo is not working for the american people. health insurance is becoming more expensive by the day. families can't afford it. businesses can't afford it. the federal government can't afford it.

smaller businesses and individuals who don't get coverage at work are squeezed especially hard. and insurance companies freely ration health care based on who is sick and who is healthy, who can pay and who can't. that's the status quo. that's the system we have right now. democrats and republicans agree this is a serious problem for america, and we agree that if we do nothing, we throw up our hands and walk away, it's a problem that will only grow worse. nobody disputes that. more americans will lose their family's health insurance if they switch jobs or lose their jobs. more small businesses will be forced to choose between health care and hiring. more insurance companies will deny people coverage who have preexisting conditions, or they'll drop people's coverage when they get sick and need it most. and the rising cost of medicare

and medicaid will sink our government deeper and deeper, and deeper into debt. on all of this we agree. 10th question is what do we do -- so the question is, what do we do about it? >> on one end of the specktrum there are some who said we scrap private insurance and replace it with a government-run health care system and though many other countries have such a system, in america it would be neither practical nor realistic. on the other end of the smrek trum, there are those and this includes most republicans in congress it's to loosen regulations on the insurance agencies. whether it's minimum standards for the kind of insurance they can sell, the argument is that will somehow lower costs. i disagree with that approach. i'm concern that had this would only give the insurance

industry even freer reign to raise premiums and deny care. so i don't believe we should give government bureaucrats or insurance bureaucrats more control over health care in america. i believe it's time to give the american people more control over their health care and their health insurance. i don't believe we can afford to leave life and death decisions about health care to the discretion of insurance company executives alone. i believe that doctors and nurses and physicians assistants like the ones in this room should be free to decide what's best for their patients. [applause] now the proposal i put forward gives americans more control over their health insurance and

their health care. by holding insurance companies more accountable. it builds on the current system where most americans get their health insurance from their employer. if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. i can tell you, the father of two young girls, i would not want any plan that interfears with the relationship between a family and their doctor. essentially, my proposal would change three things about the current health care system. first, it would end the worst practices of insurance companies -- no longer would they be able to deny your coverage because of preexisting conditions. no longer would they be able to drop your coverage because you got sick. no longer would they be able to force you to pay unlimited amounts of money out of your own pocket.

no longer would they be able to arbitrarily and like anthem blue cross tried to do in california, up tow 39% increase ins one year in the individual market. those practices would end. second, my proposal would give uninsured individuals and small business owners the same kind of choice of private health insurance that members of congress get for themselves. because if it's good enough for members of congress, it's good enough for the people who pay their salary. [applause] the reason federal employees get a good deal on health insurance is that we all participate in an insurance market where insurance companies give better coverage and better rates. because they get more

customers. it's an idea that many republicans have embraced in the past. before politics spruded. intruded. and my proposal says that if you still can't afford the insurance in this new marketplace, even though it's going to provide better deals for than those they can get in the individual place we can offer tax credits amounting to the largest tax cut in health care in history. after all the wealthiest among us can already buy the best insurance there is and the least well off is able to get coverage through medicaid. it's the middle class that gets squeezed, and that's who we have to help. now it is absolutely true that all of this will cost some money. about $100 billion per year. but most of this comes from the nearly $2 trillion a year that

america already spends on health care. but a lot of it is not spent wisely. a lot of that money is being wasted or spent badly. so within this plan, we're going to make sure the dollars we spend go towards making insurance more affordable and more secure. we're going to eliminate wasteful taxpayer subsidies that currently go to pharmaceuticals and seat fee on insurance companies that stand to gain a lot of money an roft as millions of americans are able to buy insurance and we're going to make sure that the wealthy americans pay their fair share on medicare. the bottom line is our proposal is paid for. and all the new money generate indeed this plan goes back to small businesses and middle class families who can't afford health insurance. it would also lore prescription drug prices for seniors and would help train new doctors and nurses and figures

assistants to provide care for american families. finally, my proposal would bring down the cost of health care for millions. families, businesses and the federal government. we have now incorporated most of the serious ideas from across the political specktrum about how to contain the rising cost of health care. ideas that go after the waste and abuse in our system, especially in programs like medicare. but we do this while protecting medicare benefits. and extending the financial stability of the programs by nearly a decade. our cost-cutting measures mirror most of the proposals in the current senate bill which reduces most premiums and brings down our deficit by up to a trillion dollars over the next two decades, brings down our deficit. those aren't my numbers.

those are the savings determined by the congressional budget office, which is the washington ack are anymore for the non-partisan, i. referee of congress in terms of how much stuff costs. so that's our proposal. this is where we've ended up. it's an approach that has been debated and changed and i believe improved over the last year. it incorporate it is best ideas from democrats and republicans. including some of the ideas that republicans offered during the health care summit like funding state grants on medical mall practice and cushing waste and fraud and abuse in the health department and gets rid of pro vegses that were more about winning individual crotes have in congress than improving health care for all americans. now despite all that we agree on and all the republican ideas we've incorporated, many,

probably most republicans in congress just have a fundamental disagreement over whether we should have more or less oversight of insurance companies. and if they truly believe less regulation would lead to higher quality, more affordable health insurance then they should vote against the proposal i put forth. some also believe we should, instead of doing what i'm proposing take a piece meal approach where we tinker around things for the next few years. even some say we can't afford to help right now which is why the congressional proposal covers 3 hypothetical while we cover 31 million. the problem with that approach is that unless everyone has access to affordable coverage you can't prevent insurance

companies from denying coverage due to preexisting conditions and can't limit the amount people are forced to pay out of their own pockets, they rest on everybody having access to coverage and you also don't do anything about the fact that taxpayers currently end up subsidizeing the uninsured when they are forced to go to the emergency room for care to the tune of about $1,000 per family. you can't get those savings if people are still going to the emergency room. health care reform only woshes if you take care of all these problems at once. both during and after last week's summit, republicans in congress insisted the only acceptable course is to start over. but given these honest and substantial differences between the parties, about the need regulate the insurance industry

and the need to help many middle class families i don't see how another year of negotiations would help. more other the insurance companies aren't starting over. they are continuing to raise premiums and deny coverage as we speak. for us to start over now could simply lead to delays that could last for another decade or even more. the american people and the u.s. economy just can't wait that long. so no matter which approach you favor, i believe the united states congress owe it is american people a final vote on health care reform. [applause]

>> we have debated this issue thoroughly. not just for the past year, but for decades. reform has already passed the house with a majority. it has already passed the senate with a super majority of 60 vows. and now it deserve it is same kind of up or down vote that was cast on health care reform, on children's health care program that was used for cobra, health coverage for the unemployed and by the way for both bush tax cuts. all of which had to pass congress with nothing more than a simple majority. i have therefore asked leaders in both houses of congress to finish their work and schedule a vote in the next few weeks. from now until then, i will do everything in my power to make the case for reform. and i --

[applause] -- and i urge every owner in make their voice heard as well. every family, every business, every patient, every doctor, every nurse, every physicians' assistant, make your voice heard. this has been a long and wrenching debate. it has stoked great passions among the american people and their representatives. and that's because health care is a difficult issue. it is a complicated issue. if it was easy, it would have been solved long ago. as all of you know from experience, health care can literally be an issue of life or death and as a result it easily lends itself to

gamesmanship and misrepresentation and misunderstanding. but that's not an excuse for those of us who were sent here to lead. that's not an excuse for us to walk away. we can't just give up because the politics are hard. i know there's been a fascination bordering on obsession in this media town about what passing health care insurance would mean after this election and the one after that. how will this play? what will happen with the poll? i will leave it to others to sit through the politics, because that's not what this is about. that's not why we're here. this is about what reform would mean for the mother with breast cancer whose insurance company will finally have to pay for her chemotherapy. it's what reform will mean for

the small business owners who will no longer have to choose between hiring more workers or covering the employees she has or families who will be able to afford health care insurance for the first time in their lives and get a check-up once in a while and have security about their children if they get sick. this is about what reform would mean for all those men and women i've met takeover last few years who have been brave enough to chair share -- share their stories. i talked to a young mother in wisconsin. her name was laura, she has two young children. she thought she had beaten her breast cancer but later discovered it spread to her bones. she and her husband were working and had medical insurance but it still landed them in debt and now she

worries about debt when all she wants to do is focus on spending time with her children and getting well. >> this shouldn't happen in the united states, and it doesn't have to. [applause] in the end that's what this debate is about. it's about what kind of country we want to be. it's about the millions of lives that would be touched and in some cases saved by making private health care more affordable. but it's not just our ability to stholve problem but any problem. the american people want to know if it's still possible for washington to look out for their interests and their future. they are waiting for us to act. they are waiting for us to lead. and as long as i hold this

office i intend to provide this leadership. i do not know how this plays politically, but i know it's right. and so i ask congress to finish its work and look forward signing this reform into law. thank you very much, everybody. let's get it done. [applause]

[applause] >> senate minority leader mitch mcconnell responded to the president saying there would be a national referendum on this election if democrats pass the bill. this is 20 minutes. >> where are all the lab coats? you guys don't wear lab coats? every press conference on this subject is surrounded by lab coats. nobody supplied you with a lab coat? i thought it would be appropriate to make some observations about the president's comments today. and then i'll be happy to throw

it open for whatever you'd like to talk about. in discussing where he is, he left out at few things. i noticed he didn't mention the half a trillion in medicare cuts. he didn't mention the $500 billion -- half a trillion in new taxes. and he didn't mention that the size of this measure when fully implemented over a 10-year period is $2.5 trillion in new spending. now i appreciate, we all do, the president's call for a bipartisan approach. but where we're headed through the use of reconciliation means that the only thing that will be bipartisan about this proposal is the opposition to it. the opposition to it.

it is abundantly clear that the president and the democratic leadership are calling upon their members to ignore the wishes of the american people. we know where the people are. it's not even close. never in my time here have i dealt with an issue that people paid more attention to than this one. and if you think about it, we're all interested in our health care no matter what age you are. more when you get a little older burks everybody is focused on this issue like a laser. and we know where they are on this subject and our democratic friends know where they are on this subject. so this is really not an argument between democrats and republicans it's an argument between the democrats and the american people. and to hark back just for a moment to the scott brown election. there were a lot of after-action reviews about what happened in massachusetts and why.

one thing is clear. if you look at the surveys that were taken. you guys didn't do any exit polls, but there were polls taken that day of voters asking them why they did what they did. in the most liberal state in america, 48% mentioned health care and no other subject had more than 57. than 5%. so looking at the political situation, i don't think there's a democrat in the house of representatives or the senate who fails to understand that the american people are not for this. if they are not for it in massachusetts, they are not for it anywhere. so what are the leaders left with arguing to their members? well, one argument that's been used is make history. looking at this poll data, one could conclude that you would be history if you voted for

this bill. another argument being made is we know everybody dislikes us. we know we're asking you to do something courageous but if we pass it, it will be behind us. well, listen, i assure you that if this bill is somehow passed, it won't be behind our democrat ic friends. it will be ahead of them because every meeting this fall will be a referendum issue and there's an idea every candidate will be reappealing it. so the issue will not be behind them. it will be ahead of them and i'd like to have as close as we have had in this area a referendum on the issue. we don't usually have national referendum, but this could very

well be a national referendum. with that, let me just throw it open for whatever questions you'd like to ask. >> how vulnerable would you see this bill challenges under the bird rule? >> well, i'm not going to lay out every move we may make, but obviously senator byrd, the author of the budget bill and author of the the bird rule under health care reconciliation is an outrage that should be resisted. so we know what the author of the bill thought of reconciliation using it in this way on this subject. we're going to scrub the bill thoroughly. but i'm not going to announce it in advance what efforts would be made, but you know obviously there will be plenty. >> democrats just held a news

cops in which they held up senator bunning as a primary example to the american people as to why reconciliation is needed because of what they say is republican obstruction. you don't want a health care issue. you just want the issues. >> what we faux about the bill is we don't want to it pass and the impression the american people get is that the administration and majority are very arrogant about this. today the we are martyr, and that we're going to give it to you whether you want it or not and in regards to the -- let me make a few points about that. vimplely every time reconciliation has been used, the results were bipartisan support.

virtually every time reconciliation is -- has been used, the people were in favor of what was being done. two examples to the contrary. the democrats in 1993, with what we described at the time as the largest tax increase in history, and the republicans in 2005 that made what seemed like at the time moderate deductions but mailed in comparison to the half a trillion in medicare cuts we're talking about here. what happened after the 1993 vote in 1994? the congress switched hands. >> what happened in 2006 after the 2005 vote? the congress switched hands. so we have an example of what

by each side, and we know what happened that next year. so i would say to my democratic friends, you ignore the overwhelming desires of the american people at your own payroll and and we have recent examples. >> i faux you're not going to discuss spesketly what you might do to try to block the bill. but generally speaking how vigorous an effort to democrats expect your conference to mount and block and derail their ability? >> well, they are making a vigorous effort to try to jam this it could be a policy mistake and resorting to these kind of tactics to thumb your nose at the american people is something that ought to be resisted. there are certain things that you ought to say no to.

differences of opinion here about the way to go. i would just quote one other quote i would give you represented to the use of reconciliation in this scongs from the number two who we will be testing some reconciliation rules and provisions that have never -- here tough number two democrats and this is not an ordinary thing even though they've been arguing that it's ordinary. so this is an extraordinary use of this device in order to sort of get pass desean >> democrats don't plan to move to the reconciliation bill until after the house -- the bill, at that point at which

point would you'd have the call cuss. look, i'm not going to assume that this thing is going to pass the house. no matter how many times they try to dress it up, the house is going to be called upon. house democrats only are going to be called upon to vote on a bill that has the cornhusker kick back, louisiana purchase and gator -- and the -- the votes will be there. and the public going to such extraordinary linux to ignore public opinion. it is not going to put the issue behind them. it's going to put the issue ahead of them. yes? >> senator bunning said the $10 billion extensions will be paid

for by cutting spending errors rather than acrewing new debt. was he right or wrong? >> well, we moved on to a new bill. we had that vote yesterday. everybody vote indeed our final passage. as well as you can the you been in the public is still so much against this, why are they pushing this bill? >> it's a stunning thing. i am hard-pressed to answer that question. i remember how difficult it was just taking the medicare cuts alone. just part of the unpopularity of this bill. i can remember how challenging it was for us to explain in 2006 don't hold me to the exact number but 10-20 billion

reduction in the rate of increase of medicare over five years. explain that. we're talking here, ladies and gentlemen, about a half a trillion dollars over the next 10 years takeover objections of hospitals, of hospice. of med this is politically toxic in the extreme. and it's not being used to make medicare solven't, which is going under in seven years anyway,but to use it as a piggy bank for something else, look -- and i'm not suggesting to you that everything we do around here should be determined by public opinion polls. but this is no small issue.

1/6 of the economy, endless debates and discussions. the american people become come meetly -- in the time i've never has an issue where now admittedly that's anecdotal, but i'm reasonnably well known at home and a lot of people come up to me on thonings and i'm sure that's going on all across the country. there's a time for courage and a time for caution. courage was demonstrated on things like passing the civil rights act which passed overwhelmingly. the social security pass roamingly. bipartisan. this is a narrow, partisan

/bipartisan opposition move to override the wishes of the american people. it is quite audacious by in standards. yes? >> some of the republican colleges say the issue of this year's midterm should be taxed, do you think that's -- >> i'm sure starting a new spending program is something they would not have supported. so i think it will be the issue in the fall campaign, and as i said earlierier at the risk of being redoesn'tn't, the democrats -- by approving it, it will get it behind them, but it would only get it ahead of them. >> would that be something that

you would pursue? >> well, i'm not going to predict the fall election. many have tried to get me to commit to that. we hope to be in a better passion one more. yes. >> have you had a chance to reach out to senator hutchison after her loss in the texas govern's race? and what did you say to her? and would you support her plans to retire after health care gets finished? >> i have not spoken with her. you'll have to ask her about her plans. i'm told she is going to be back soon. and we're proud to have her as a member of our conference and hope to have her for a long time. thank you. .