guest: is. just to do the grass panels from the capitol to the washington monument. that would . roger in arizona. democrat. caller: i have a question. i live about 10 minutes away from the oregon border. there has been a lot of damage there from the undocumented border crossings, but lots of drugs coming through there. drugs coming through there. i wonder if that situation has improved? guest: is a great question. i was just they're just a month

ago. -- i was just that there a month agthere a month ago. i did meet with park's death. it is a challenging situation, but it has gotten better. -- i did meet with park staff. the national park service and forest service are working closely together to strike that balance. obviously, border security and risk to the american public is the top priority, but it can be done, and it is being done in such a manner to protect the resources of organ pipe -- oregon pipe, and all of the other resources there as well. we are all working well in a coordinated fashion to provide

security at the border, but at the same time, protecting park resources. host: john jarvis is the director of the national park service. jacob is on the independent line. caller: good morning, how are you doing? i had a few questions. i have been through quite a few of the national parks, and i have done a lot of backpacking in the forest areas in colorado, california, idaho. . i believe it was north dakota they brought up the issue of hemp farming. for the forest service, there's a great interest to protect tree

forestry efforts -- i'm sorry, for logging. i am curious as to how the national park service -- you don't work necessarily hand-in- hand with that, but you somewhat overlap. is the national park service making any effort to increase the forestry service lost interest in conservation? hostguest: i have worked very closely with the forestry service in oregon, with several national forests, or cascades national park. at that local level, we work very closely to have similar

conservation efforts on both sides of the border so there is not an abrupt change when someone like you, jacob, the backpacks along the pacific west real -- trail and you crass through plans. as i indicated before, the forest service, the department of agriculture, and maybe you ought to have the head of the forestry service talk about the challenges he faces managing the forest land. but they have a conservation ethic as well. they also have the responsibility to provide timber for this country as well. so striking that appropriate balance and providing for conservation, watershed, and recreation, that is a challenge for them. along with the other multiple uses. host: have a couple of viewers commenting on twitter about their experience at the national

park. want said that the first time he saw the grand canyon, it is but the way, called it totally awesome. -- it took his breath away, called it totally awesome. you must get a lot of that feedback. guest: we get a lot of it. i never tire of hearing about the public's experiences at the national parks. the public are looking at the grand canyon and i am looking at the public, because i love to hear them talk about what they are experiencing. the public have always been inspired by and had this love affair with these extraordinary landscapes. this is what burns talked about with it being america's best idea that we would set these places aside. historically, was really interesting about it was that as the country was forming, we

really did not have the cathedrals of europe, but we had places like the grand canyon and the giant redwoods. we chose to stand as up. today they still attract 40 million international visitors a year to this country. we get about 289 million visitors a year from all of around the world. host: i wonder what are the more frequently expressed his and or concerns you hear from the public. -- frequently expressed criticisms or concerns you hear from the public. guest: visitors come up repeatedly. what i worked at a national park which is only an hour and a half to two hours from downtown seattle, i would run into people on the trail and it would be the 50th visit that summer.

their comments can be extraordinarily specific. there are like, "there is a sign up on this trail that is a little bit deteriorated. can you fix that?" we love that, because that kind of input helps us book is on our efforts -- helps us focus on our efforts. in general, i think the biggest concern for the future is that there is a large segment of the american population that do not know national parks exist. they are not experiencing them, they are not coming. but typically communities of color -- particularly communities of color. for a variety of reasons. maybe lack of knowledge, lack of transportation, lack of experience. to me, frankly, that is a concern, because i want every american to be able to walk to the rim of the grand canyon and have that same kind of powerful

experience that you get when you see it for the first time, and the fact that there is a large segment of the public that is not doing it, that is a problem. host: as we talked about earlier in the show, some of the challenges being faced and incorporated into the budget are dealing with the facilities. guest: the national park service has an extraordinary inventory, about 17,000 structures. we have a museum collection is second only to the smithsonian. we have thousands and thousands of structures, thousands of miles of road. just managing and maintaining all of that so that it is safe and accessible for the public is one of our number one priority. host: as the, republican, burlington. caller: hello, good morning. guest: good morning.

caller: here is the thing -- the national park service's plan, but the bureau of nland management owns too much land in this country. it is a travesty, because they take over the line and just let it sit there. rest regular americans, people like me, -- whereas regular americans, people like me, put on a piece of property and we could make it better than the -- and we could maintain it better than the blm dies. it is a national treasure, but listening to what you just said about people of color -- you cannot say that. you are trying to say that they are brain-dead and they don't know national parks? please don't hang up on me. you sound like you are going on the european and model where we provide invitations to have people see our national parks. this is crazy. guest: bureau of land

management, some of the forest service, as a challenge of providing conservation and recreation and gravel and 8 wide range of things for this country. they are consistent wrote to the national park service and the department of the interior. -- they are an assistant beirut to the national park service and the department of the interior. i have sympathy for the challenges that they have. statistically, our visitors that come to the national parks, we are not seeing an equivalent demographic that reflects the ethnic diversity of the country. we are seeing that large segments of the american population, american citizens, are not coming to the national parks. places like gettysburg, antietam, yorktown, that are quintessential components of our american experience are not seeing visitation as often at

these kinds of places. it is important to remind all americans that this is their story, this is their inheritance, and they are invited. we're not suggesting anything like any type of movement. we just want to make sure that everyone feels welcome and is invited to come and participate in the national parks. host: the questions asked as the president talks about -- guest: i will tell you an experience. we went up to baltimore to meet with kids in the baltimore area that if in and around fort mchenry, fort mchenry being a war of 1812, the inspiration for francis scott key and "the star spangled banner." quintessential component of the american experience and story. it is where we get our anthem. and yet there were kids in that community that did not know about 4 mckendree, did not know

about its history and did not feel connected to that. part of it was to work with the parks to work with schools particularly to incorporate this great resource right there in baltimore into their historic -- into their history curriculum. it is not as something they can read in textbook, but they can come out to fort mchenry and learn about that history, but also, our interpretation of the story needed to incorporate what it was like to be a teenager. what was a like to be a teenager in the war of 1812 when they were living there? it suddenly makes the story relevant to young people. that is just a simple shift in the way we talk about it. host: democratic caller, jerome in pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i would like to say thank you for c-span, and the caller

earlier mentioned the monument in south dakota to crazy horse. i thought he might be interested to know that if he wants to see it up close, he needs to be out there the first full weekend in june, when you are allowed to hike up to the sculpture. it truly is an amazing thing. it is about an hour's ride from mount rushmore. of course, both of them are well worth seeing. that is all i wanted to say. guest: thanks, jerome. i don't think i will make it out there the first of june, but i have been to mount rushmore a number of times but i've never been to the crazy horse sculpture. i would love to go some day. host: texas, independent line. caller: hi.

thanks for taking my call and thank you for c-span. last summer i had the opportunity to visit arlington national cemetery and also the moses cone state park in north carolina. i regret to tell you that i was almost ashamed of the arlington national cemetery. frankly, the condition of the parking lot there -- there was at least one pot hole where you could lose of volkswagen. as i thought of people coming to the united states to see our country and to see that kind of maintenance, i was extremely upset. when i went down to moses cone state park in north carolina, or moses cone park in north carolina, it is one i had not heard of, but it is a beautiful place. but again, there were serious maintenance issues. i was very disturbed to hear about the money that was going to be spent to increase the number of buildings and to make

it larger when the the basic condition really, i did not think, represented the conditions we would want to show to not only our own people, but particularly the people from across the country. guest: thanks for those comments, and i think that your comments and your observations about how we take care of these places is very important and important for you as a citizen to continue to make that known. in terms of arlington cemetery, that is not a national park service responsibility but that is the veterans affairs that takes care of arlington cemetery. the state park system sometimes -- each state has its own state court system, the responsibility of the state government. -- has its own state park system, the responsibility of the state government. they are not the responsibility of the national park system. our units are chosen because of their national significance.

and we actually assist the states in this century, last century, in establishing a state park system, feeling that the needs to be a broader distribution of parks in general. the american public loves the parks and frankly in many cases don't care who manages them. they just want it well taken care of. there really needs to be, and there is, and it is the great thing about this country, that we have a sort of a variety of parks, from the top lot to the city park to the community park, the regional park, the state park, the national park. national parks are places you go perhaps on the weekend or on vacation. but i always ask where you go after dinner, where to go if you just have a few hours. those parts are in many ways just as essential as the national parks, because we need those kinds of spaces.

i just drove past dupont circle this weekend and was completely loaded with folks here in washington, d.c., enjoying the beautiful sunny weekend day. parks are essential to our mental health and physical health as well. but they also need to be maintained. i hope that folks annie cho -- folks in charge of moses, will take care of it. host: we cannot let you go without finding out what is your favorite site. what is one that is overlooked? guest: they are all my favorites now. but i would say that the national park and preserve in alaska is a fantastic place. it is not well known. people go to alaska to see others, and sometimes they overlook the fantastic park, and i

>> we of vast workforce out there with people can -- who cannot learn and compete. 80% of the people right now, we have to do more with them. >> whether bill clinton from 1987 or last week, the c-span video library adds to the people that you can follow. search it, watch it, click it, and share it -- every program since 1987 available at the c- span video library. >> president obama had the opportunity to appoint a supreme court justice to replace retiring supreme court justice john stevens. he will discuss this. we will hear first from the president followed by a german rate -- chairman of the way.

>> all right, everybody. we are here to talk about the supreme court. obviously, we have lost one of -- the services of one of the finest supreme court justices that we have seen. justice stevens announced that he will be retiring at the end of this term. those are going to be some tough shoes to fill. this is somebody who operated with extraordinary integrity and fidelity to the law. but i am confident that we can come up with a nominee who will gain the confidence of the senate and the confidence of the country, and the confidence of individuals who look to the court to provide evenhanded justice to all americans. last time when i nominated sonia sotomayor, i have to say that all the individuals who are sitting here -- mitch mcconnell, harry reid, jeff sessions, and

patrick leahy -- worked very cooperatively on what i consider to be a smooth, civil, thoughtful nomination process and confirmation process. and i very much thank particularly the ranking member and chairman of the judiciary committee for running a smooth process. my hope is that we can do it the exact same thing this time. last time the nomination went up at the end of may. we are certainly going to meet that deadline and we hope maybe we can accelerate it a little bit so that we have some additional time. but my hope is that we are going to be able to get a supreme court nominee confirmed in time for the next session. as justice stevens said, i think it is very important, particularly given the important cases that may be coming before the supreme court, that we get this process wrapped up so that a new justice can be seated and

staffed and can work effectively with his or her colleagues in time for the fall session. so i just want to thank all of these gentlemen for their input. they are here to consult with me. one thing that we did last time was to listen to the thoughts and views of our colleagues before i nominated a candidate. i take this process very seriously. and so i am going to be interested in hearing their thoughts and concerns before any final decisions are made. with that, let me call on one question. bidding, you get the shot. >> would you be willing to nominate someone who did not support a woman's right to choose? >> no, i am somebody who believes -- you know, i am somebody who believes that women should have the ability to make often very difficult

decisions about their run bodies and issues of reproduction. obviously this has been a hugely contentious issue in our country for very long time. i will say the same thing that every president has said since this issue came out, which is i do not have litmus tests around any of these issues. but i will say that i want somebody who is going to be interpreting our constitution in a way that takes into account individual rights, and that includes women's rights. and that is going to be something that is very important to me because i think part of what our core constitution -- constitutional values promote is the notion that individuals are protected in their privacy and their bodily integrity, and women are not exempt from that. all right. thank you. i appreciate it.

you know, i think we've got some terrific potential candidates. >> thank you, later. i think it was a very good meeting. i appreciate the president reaching out to both parties he is a constitutional lawyer and understands the need to do this. it is extremely important. i agree with leader reid we want this to go like the sotomayor hearing and the roberts hearing, a hearing before the senate reflected in the way the american people expect us to act. i am not looking for a nomination to was there for republicans or democrats. i want them there for the american people. and that certainly would be in keeping with what justice stevens has been. he was nominated by republican

presidents, confirmed in 2.5 weeks by an overwhelmingly democratic senate, and he as been a justice for all the american people. that is what we need to do. while the justice is going to make decisions on the constitution and not political reasons. we have right now of very activist -- conservative activist supreme court. a number of decisions, like ledbetter or anything else, decided by a one-vote margin, i think that this does not reflect the american people but more of a partisan agenda. i would hope that the president's agenda -- nominee can get us back to wait for that. i was very impressed with the meeting of the president, what both my republican colleagues, and of course my democratic colleagues.

if we have a nomination soon, we can do this nomination in such a way that we can have a new justice in place to be prepared for the next session of the court. >> did any of you suggest names to the president? >> i have and it has been done on a private basis as i think it should be done. >> i have talked to the president about names. one of the reasons why i have given advice on judicial matters to the president, i hope it is valuable to him and that it goes just to him. >> did he mention any names to you all? >> that conversation now will lead there. >> no names were discussed? >> no names were discussed. [unintelligible] >> let's wait until we see what

happens. we will have a nominee, the nominee will be confirmed, and i would hope it would be for the american people. i remember a very liberal group picketing outside my office when i chose to vote for david souter. they said i would never be reelected. i thought it was the best thing for america. and we are all glad that justice souter is there. i would hope that nobody would stakeout a position before even hearing the nominees. i know the president is doing this very carefully. he is doing this very thoughtfully. then we have our role to advise and consent, to vote for or vote

against the nominee, but there will be a new justice on the supreme court when the court comes back into session. >> un the republicans have a different view on who should sit on the court. were those differences aired at all? >> we had a very good meeting with the president. >> thank you all. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> next on c-span, the senate budget committee begins work on the annual budget resolution through the national search purity adviser james jones. our interview with former ambassador to afghanistan zalmay khalilzad, and the house pays tribute to a civil-rights activist dorothy height. >> i think there is a huge lack

of knowledge about how congress works. >> when you're doing the actual research work, you have to do it yourself. >> this weekend, all award winning historians will talk about their work, their books, and their profession. and revisit their first appearances on our network. "q&a," sunday night and c-span. >> c-span -- our public affairs content is available on television, radio, and online. you can also connect with us on twitter, facebook, and youtube. sign up for schedule alert e- mails at c-span.org. >> earlier today the senate budget committee began its markup of the annual budget resolution. a blueprint that sets out the government's spending third senators gave opening statements but no votes were held. the committee is scheduled to begin consideration of amendments to the resolution at 9:00 eastern time tomorrow

morning. this is 2.5 hours. >> a lot like to begin with procedural announcement. i would ask members to limit their remarks to five minutes, given the late start that we have because of the vote. i understand there are a number of meetings that we have to try to work around, that members will have to leave for, and we understand that. after opening statements, we will lay down the mark. there will be no votes today. tonight my staff will be available to answer any questions other staff may have of them. members will then reconvene at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow at the suggestion of the ranking member to begin considering amendments. we will stay here tomorrow as

late as it takes. i would remind members that our committee rules prohibit proxy voting on budget resolutions and its amendments, so all members will need to be here in person to cast their vote. it would be my intention to have one series of stacked votes around noon and another later in the afternoon. i have discussed this with senator gregg and he agrees. as in past years, we ask that all amendments other than full substitutes be fully offset over the total of the year covered by the resolution. amendments need to be paid for over that time period to be considered here in the committee. i would encourage members not to offer sense of the senate amendments. we have excluded them from day of market sell. i think we've done a very good job in recent years and not doing sense of the senate amendments in this committee. in addition, i would note that

we would be consulting with the parliamentarians on amendments that are offered to be and should -- to be sure that they are in our jurisdiction, because we have that issue to consider. we intend to file the resolution and the committee print on monday. that will give us us typically going right to the floor. we have not been able to wait until monday. in this case, we are able to wait until monday. that would give us extra time for use by members. we invite members to fight -- to file written views pilot -- by no later than noon on monday. if you could make sure it that our budget committee staff be given any member comments that you want filed. before i begin with the description of the mark, i want to note that this will be senator gregg loss last budget

resolution marked up, because he will be leaving the senate at the end of this session. let me just say what a pleasure in has been -- it has been to work with him as the ranking member of this committee. you could not have a better ranking member. you could not have a better chairman and senator gregg. we have not always agree on every detail, and certainly we've had policy differences, but in terms of recognizing the debt threat to this country, we have had very significant agreement. and we have had, i think, strong and substantive debates on this committee. and that is a credit to every member. >> i note relief in your voice and happiness in your step that you are leaving. >> know, truthfully, i will very much ms. you. and i am particularly proud of the work we have done on the

approach of the fiscal commission, and while our proposal to not get the required 60 votes, we did get a strong bipartisan majority and i'm very hopeful that this commission, that some of the members of this commission will serve on it, and bear fruit in facing up to the debt threat overhanging this country, because i think it is one of the most significant threats facing america. >> if i can break in on that point, i what i thank you for all of your courtesy. and for a really positive and constructive relationship, the type of relationship that we approach things in a professional way, and when we agreed, work together very aggressively such as the debt commission. and we have disagreed substantively and it is set a nice town and i appreciate your leadership in that area, and your staff has been open and available to my staff.

and i would also note that another senator will be heading on. >> that was the next thing i wanted -- the next thing i wanted to say that this is senator bunning's last marked up because he will be leaving us at the end of the session. i have always been a big fan of jim bunning, whether on the ball field or in this committee or in the senate of the united states, because you have been a serious legislator. i also serve on the finance committee with him, and many times he and i have teamed up on amendments successfully in the finance committee, and i will miss him very much. i also want to welcome senator begich from alaska who is joining the committee. the former mayor of anchorage and a businessman so he brings an important perspective to this

committee. i also want to say in reference to senator bunning and that i thank him for war -- working with senator warner on a task force for government performance. i think that is a work effort that is going to produce dividends over time. santer bunning has put in significant time on that to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of government. that is a daunting challenge, but they have made a meaningful contribution. let me begin by noting some of the key statistics regarding the mark that i will be presenting later. it cuts spending as a share of the national economy by 11%. it cuts the deficit as a share of the economy by 70%. i your share of the economy or percentage of the gross domestic product because it, stella's that is the best way to measure changes over time, to provide an

apples to apples comparison. the chairman's mark also include $671 billion more in deficit reduction than does the president's budget. and it cuts taxes by $780 billion over the five years. most of that, a middle-class tax cut. hear some of the polish -- the policy highlights contained in the chairman's mark. it includes importantly measures to promote economic growth and jobs, provides for a tax cut on small business investment, and it includes investments and highways and transit. it extends unemployment insurance and cobra, it includes a reserve fund to remote employment and job growth that must be paid for, and it includes a reserve fund for tax reform and tax relief. i personally believe that the time is right for fundamental

tax reform. we need to make this system more efficient, more effective, and allow our country to be more competitive on the world economy and also we need a system that is more fair. the chairman's mark also promotes fiscal responsibility. it reduces the deficit to 3% of gdp by 2015, which is the interim goal of the president with respect to the fiscal commission. but i think we need to do that in the work of this committee. it includes a non-security discretionary freeze for three years. it comes very close to a freeze for four years. it sinks up the senate paygo rule with the statutory paygo enacted earlier this year, and retains the requirement that reconciliation be used for deficit reduction only. now the chairman's mark makes important progress on reducing

that deficit over the five years. more must be done over the longer term. the president's fiscal commission has been tasked with addressing the long-term problem. the chairman's mark assist in this effort by providing a reduction reserve fund to ensure that savings from the commission cannot be spent and are used to reduce deficits and debt. the one thing we have been concerned about is that we could have the commission work effectively and in congress command on the side and take those savings and use it for some other purpose. we're doing what we think is the best read it to prevent that from occurring. the chairman's mark also allows for investment in education and energy. it provides funding for early education, elementary, and secondary schools, and college affordability.

and it provides funding for alternative and clean energy, energy efficiency, and green jobs. as i noted before, spending as a percentage of the gross domestic product is cut 11% on to the chairman's mark. it makes that 11% cut in three years. that deficit is cut from 1.4 -- $1.4 trillion. the deficit as a percentage of the gross domestic product is cut 70%. from 9.8% in 2010 to 3% in 2015. economists believe that under current economic conditions, the deficit of 3% would roughly stabilize the federal debt. that is an interim step. it is not enough. more needs to be done. that is why the work of the fiscal commission is so important.

the turnaround in our economic book -- outlook has been really quite remarkable. the actions taken over the last 1.5 years by the federal reserve, by the congress, and the administration has clearly helped pull us back from the brink. economic growth in the first quarter of 2009 was -6.4%, and in the last quarter of last year, that has turned into a positive 5.6% economic growth. and we have seen steady improvement in the job sector. january 2009, the economy was losing almost 800,000 jobs by this march, the economy was gaining 162,000 jobs in the month of march. here is the latest cover of newsweek. it reads, all"america is back." i would be the last one to argue

that we have fully recovered because we have stubbornly high unemployment and stubbornly high underemployment. they're still far too many of our fellow citizens that are unemployed and underemployed, and they are struggling and we clearly must respond to their needs. to help restore fiscal discipline and bring down the deficit, the chairman's mark freezes non-security domestic spending for three years. the 2011 non-security discretionary level is actually slightly below that 2010 enacted level. within the context of this freeze, the chairman's mark still makes room for certain high priority investment. education -- to improve student achievement and make college more affordable, to help prepare the work force to compete in a global economy and generate economic growth. specifically, the germans broke

-- the chairman's mark bonds the remaining pell grant shortfall and assumes a maximum grant of $5,550. it extends the simplified college tax credit which provides up to $2,500 a year for students. our energy investments will reduce our dependence on foreign energy. i personally believe there are very few higher priorities than reducing our dependence on foreign energy. many of the members here were part of the group of 10 that became a group of 20, 10 democrats, 10 republicans, putting together an alternative energy policy for this country. many of those initiatives are funded in this budget. it provides a reserve fund to accommodate legislation to provide clean energy and address climate change issues. it includes $500 million above

the president's level of discretionary funding for energy in 2011. it builds on the economy -- the economic recovery package investments in renewable energy, efficiency and conservation, low carbon coal technology, and modernizing the electrical grid. we have gridlock on the grid, and one of the most important things to improve the competitive position of our country is to break the grid -- break the gridlock on the grid. the chairman's mark is also strong on national -- natural defense. it matches his request in 2011. it also provides for an assistant -- an additional money requested for ongoing operations. we are not deferred or excluded from the budget the war costs

that we know will come by supplemental 2010. and the full request for 2011. the next chart shows the breakdown of the discretionary funding levels in the chairman's mark compared to the 2010 enacted level. it shows that we had a 3.5% increase in defense, which equates to $20 billion. we have a $4 billion increase, or 7.7% increase, for international. all of that is dedicated to pakistan, iraq, and afghanistan, and the middle east funding requested in the budget. the rest of the president's initiative will have to compete with his other proposals, because we have cut his 2011 proposal for international by $4 billion. non-security funding -- well, i

should also indicate we have an $8 billion, or a 8.8% increase in veterans and homeland security, equally divided between the two, in line with the president's request for veterans. largely to an increase in veteran health care but also an increase in homeland security to respond to threats that have been determined by the administration. non-security funding is actually below the 2010 levels, although modestly, about $1 billion vote, so it is actually provided for in 2010. in terms of revenue, but chairman's mark has a net tax cut, $780 billion over the five years of the plan. it provides for the permanent extension of the 2001 and 2003 tax provisions for couples with

incomes below $250,000 and single individuals with income below $200,000. these policies include the 10% bracket, the child tax credit, the marriage penalty relief, certain educational provisions, and certain energy provision. it provides for two years of amt relief and for two years of estate tax reform. all of these provisions, including the income tax relief, are consistent with the exemption in the new statutory paygo law. for the amt and estate tax, the chairman's mark estimates the cost will either be paid for or resolved in the context of tax reform being considered by the president's fiscal commission. let me be clear and direct about that. some will criticize that approach. i believe we have to say, if we

want those things taken care of us, -- taking care of, and i think we all do, they have to be paid for in the context of our current fiscal condition. the chairman's mark also provides additional relief for families through the so-called extenders, including all of the research and experimentation, the state and local sales-tax extension, all of those extenders are funded in this budget. and the cost of which are all set. again, it totally provides a net tax cut, not growth, net tax cut. the chairman's mark includes a number of budget enforcement mechanisms. it includes discretionary cap for 2010-2013. we have discretionary caps for all those years.

it sinks up the senate paygo rule with statutory paygo. and as i noted earlier, it includes the deficit reserve fund to preserve the savings from the present fiscal commission to ensure that those savings cannot be spent and are only used to reduce deficits and debt. this year's health care reform effort will begin to slow the rise of health care costs but it will not be enough to resolve the long-term fiscal imbalance in the health-care accounts. we also face a demographic tidal wave from the retirement of the baby boom generation, and we face an outdated and inefficient tax code that is bleeding revenue to offshore tax havens and hurting u.s. competitiveness. so we will remain on an unsustainable long-term course that must be addressed. i am hopeful the president's

fiscal commission will develop a bipartisan plan that will make significant progress in this area. let me just conclude by talking about the commission and its responsibility. it is tasked with coming up with a plan to address the nation's on sustainable long-term fiscal condition. the plan will have a medium-term goal of reducing the deficit to 3% of gdp by 2015, something that is accomplished in this budget proposal. if enacted. it leaves everything on the table. including spending and revenues, it has 18 members, 10 democrats and eight republicans, bipartisan cochairs, erskine bowles and alan simpson, the senate republican whip. the rope for will be submitted by december 1 of this year and

importantly, the commission is coupled with firm commitments from congressional leaders to bring the panel's recommendations to a vote before the 111th congress adjourns, if 14 of the eight team members can agree. with these commitments, president's executive order is as close as we could get to the statutory commission senator gregg and i have proposed. it is going to take a lot of hard work and real dedication and difficult choices, but i am hopeful that this commission will come up with a bipartisan plan this year to address this nation's long-term budget crisis. with that, i wouldn't turn to senator gregg to make his opening remarks and then turned to individual members for their spirit again, i want to say to senator gregg, it's we appreciate the leadership you have given this country. we could not ask for more.

>> thank you, senator conrad, and thank you for those kind words, and there reciprocated by may, the pleasure to work with you and members of your team on your side of the aisle and also work with our side through these years. it is a difficult issue, the budget of the united states, because we're charged with the responsibility of having a fiscally responsible nation, and in the past we have not been and in the future it looks like we're not going to be. i do not at all or in any way underestimate your commitment to doing something about the debt which is saddling this nation and will unfortunately strangle the nation if we do not do something about it. you're the one that came up with the term, and it is a very accurate summation of the problem.

on this budget, however, i find it lacking, unfortunately. i wish it was more aggressive on the issue of the debt. it is for lack of a better word a budget that kicks the can down the road. more spending, more deficits, more debt, less prosperity inevitably for our children as a result of that. and why do i say that? as much as you have put it in the context of being a budget which brings the deficit down in relationship to gdp, it does better than the present request in relation to gdp one deficits and on percentage of gdp, but it really does not do a whole lot. if you back out the amt language and you back out the estate tax language, what you're left with really is a $4 billion cut and an adjustment to the

pell grant situation which is affecting discretionaries versus mandatory. other than that, there is no significant difference that i can find. of course we have all seen what happens with amt, and i suspect we will see what happens with the estate tax, that when it get past the two years, you will not find that it is paid for and therefore these numbers will not close as a result of that action and the way that you are hoping that they will. spending remains as you mentioned very high, historically high -- 22% of gdp under your numbers, and i suspect it will be higher because of the health-care bill and emergency spending. we're not going to get our revenues up to that level and it is a structural problem that we really need to address. i am concerned about a lot of the elements of this.

for example, the whole paygo issue. only remaining issue we have is budgetary paygo, and now that is going to be eliminated and to this bill. so we're going to subtract the statutory language, specifically structured so that a.m. tee is not address, and so there is no paygo requirements on those outside of the two years. as i mentioned, discretionary cut in here is simply a $4 billion cut relative to foreign operations next year. there is an adjustment and i respect the way that you did it relative to pell grants. as we know, pell grants were moved into the mandatory account, $5 billion, and it should estate on the discretionary side, but you approves the appropriated accounts by that, but you still

have a $5 billion expenditure on the mandatory side so i don't think that can be scored as a reduction. the real issue here, when we get down to the bottom line, is this -- we are on an unsustainable path. this year our percent of interest payments as a part of income will be 10%. 2014, it will be about -- it would get up to about 20%, 50%, somewhere around there. 2020, it will definitely be at 20%. those names -- those numbers mean that our debt will be downgraded. we are on a course to have a junk bond government. and this budget does not do anything about that. you cannot run a deficit at these levels and expected you're

not going to end up with the world looking at our debt and saying, we cannot pay it back, or if they're going to pay it back, we have to pay a huge premium. and the assumption in this budget is that we're going to maintain interest rate levels which are fairly favorable to us right now because of the world economy being flat, recession is worldwide, and therefore we are able to sell debt at a fairly cheap price. that is not going to continue. our debt price is going to go up and the assumption here that it will not is, i think, flawed and that means the numbers go up significantly as a result. we know where the money is. it is primarily on the entitlement accounts. regrettably, and this may be old ground but it needs to be mentioned again, when the health care bill was passed, it took

trillions of dollars that should have been used to stabilize our medicare and medicaid situation and moved here in that should not happen and it will aggravate dramatically our ability to address this as we go forward, either through the fiscal commission or through regular order. it will be hard to find the funds to straighten this out. this bill does not address social security because we cannot in committee, but that is the other major entitlement account that needs to be addressed. remember, both social security and medicare go into negative cash flow in terms of this budget. for the last 20 years, we have used the social security funds and the medicare funds to fund the general operation of the government instead of borrowing from the public. we will not be able to do it next year on medicare. we will not be able to do it on the five-year period on that

basis. we will actually have to borrow now to fund social security payments. we will have to borrow to pay for medicare. and we're going to have to borrow to pay for general operations of the government. and that is why our debt is at such risk and our nation is on an unsustainable path. and regrettably this budget does not address any of those issues in a substantive way. on our side of the aisle we're going to offer a series of amendments which will try to correct that. and i am sure they will be roundly received with enthusiasm and energy, things like senator sessions who is much more aggressive than this budget is, proposals on protecting medicare, on how we affect more aggressive ways of disciplining ourselves on emergency spending -- a whole series of proposals.

we will also have a reconciliation structure that is real, because the reconciliation structure in this bill sustains is. it is not his intention and he says he will protect this reconciliation structure pecan, but this is a $2 billion reconciliation instruction. did we use that word to mark congress used it to extend $2.6 trillions on a $2 billion reconciliation structure. i don't know what the $2 billion reconciliation structure means. to me, regrettably, it means that opportunity has been put on the table again to dramatically increase the size of government using the reconciliation vehicle to accomplish it. the chairman has represented to me that this will not happen

with cap-and-trade. that would be most logical when you look at the scenario and congress, but there are other places that i worry. .

>> the language and how the financial fiscal commission works. it is good language. it is the right way to handle the language. the war costs are accounted for which is very appropriate and are built into the budget. the unemployment extension should occur. that is good budgeting. we have a very serious reservations and they come down to the bottom line. the bottom line is pretty simple. this is it. this is off feet president's budget but the differences are simply the issue of how you score amt and state tax through the fifth years. the gap is there. if we did not close it, it continues to expand. what is most disturbing about this gap is that we are looking at a projected revenue which

exceeds the historic base of our revenue as a nation. up to almost 20% of gdp. still, the gap grows. it is not a revenue issue. it is a spending issue. until we are willing to step up on the spending side ledger, we are absolutely guaranteeing that we are passing on to our kids a nation which will be less prosperous and with their of standard of living will be less than ours. >> thank you. thank you for your very serious and substantive critique. i think, as you know, for the long term, i'd not agree with the characterization of the short-term but i very much agree with the characterization of where we are headed not dealing with the structural gaps that exist. it is absolutely imperative that as a country, we face up to it.

that is why you and i worked together in a very collegial and hopefully successful way. i truly hope that this commission will take on the structural gap. senator murray. >> thank you. thank you and congratulations on your last markup. i do respect your passion and commitment to this country and what you do in following through in fighting for what you believe in. congratulation. chairman konrad, thank you for your leadership and hard work and dedication to the priorities. it is never an easy process but you do make a true effort in investing in theories that you think there will make america stronger in the long term and putting our nation on may better path. that is what our charge is again

this year. a budget is a statement of priorities. hours are clear. we put our families and small business owners first and we begin to put this country back on track by investing in our future. we have inherited some huge challenges under the bush in the station, the american people were told we could have it all. two wards paid off without sacrifice except for those of the service members and families and tax cuts for the wealthiest 1% of americans. some people did have it all. wall street ceos and big banks. for average americans, the consequences were stark. by the time president obama took office, we were losing 700,000 jobs per month and our economy was shrinking rapidly and our national debt has ballooned over $12 trillion. turning that around will not happen overnight. thanks to the hard work of this committee, we have begun doing

the hard work of turning this economy around. there is no doubt we have a lot of work ahead. turning around our economy requires continued investment uiin health-care and infrastructure. these are priorities that will make our families and small businesses more competitive in the 21st century, the point that we need to continue the middle class tax cuts that were put into place last year as well as targeted job creation that puts americans back to work and help our small businesses hire and grow. we will not be able to maintain our long term strength unless we make sure that workers have the education and skills and training to fill the in demand jobs of the future. we have to continue working to help all of our students achieve a post secondary education and to help them move into a career whether through apprenticeships

our committee colleges or four year institutions. i will continue to support the retraining of america's workers in merging industries like renewable energy and health care. as we invest in our future , we can never turn our backs on those who have sacrificed so much for us and that is our nation's veterans and families and make sure that they have a health care and benefits and job resources they need when they return home. thank you for investing in that in is budget. we have to commit to cleaning up the nuclear states reject new -- nuclear sites which is a moral obligation and we cannot ignore it. another obligation is the future generations by balancing the budget and reducing our debt in

smart ways. i have a grandson. i did not want him to inherit a crumbling infrastructure or an economy in which he cannot achieve the same dreams of his parents or grandparents. i also know we cannot pay for the future on the backs of his generation. i strongly support president obama's freeze on discretionary spending. it is why i have been a long term -- longtime advocate of pay as you go. we will continue to look for places to decrease spending while making the right and smart investments to continue our recovery. i will continue to fight that the voices of the families of small businesses are heard loud and clear and we do not stop making the responsible investments that need to do that you address in this budget. we need to keep moving our country forward in a

responsible way. thank you. >> thank you. thank you for your fears advocacy of the people you represent. -- fierce advocacy of the people you represent. we will go to senator michael enzi. >> one quirk is that members are provided -- asked to provide opening statements about a problem not -- about a product we have not seen. pre-empted criticism seems unsportsmanlike grant me the opportunity to express optimism of what i hope to see in this budget. it has been said this cannot be turned around overnight but i am worried we did not have very many nights. the congressional budget office looked at the proposal last month and offered a chilling assessment of the impact. we have all seen the numbers

according to the cbo. publicly held debt with a triple from $7.50 trillion to $20.30 trillion in 2020. debt relative to the economy would explode from 53 to 90% of the economy. net interest would more than quadruple. this path is clearly unsustainable. that is the tip of the iceberg. moody's credit bridging agency revealed it looks at the proportion of federal revenues dedicated to paying interest as a key element for maintaining the aaa rating. they expect a large, creditworthy sovereign borrowers like the west to devote less than 10% of federal revenues to pay interest. under the president's proposal, we will hit that mark this year. lucky for us, moody's will grant the u.s. action wiggle room because in judgment, we can writes our canhip. -- our listingship.

i supported the creation of a bipartisan commission to restore some discipline to the federal ledger. now that you are an official member of the president's commission, congratulations. i hope you use this market as an opportunity to lay a foundation for that effort. we are prepared to assist you in process by establishing greater discipline. the key is tax reform. when the u.s. first implemented income tax, the internal revenue code could have been contained in a single 400 page textbook. the current is now over 4000 pages and that does not count the volumes of technical advice that the irs publishes every year to understand the law. adding insult to injury, between tax expenditures, income tax cuts and state tax, individuals

small businesses have no guarantees concerning taxes. and individuals and businesses cannot make hiring and investment decisions in this on certain tax and garment. current tax policy is a major impediment to economic growth and recovery. i hope this budget establishes some parameters for reform and prevents our tax code from becoming one general -- giant annual extender. i am very concerned that the new health care reforms will exacerbate our debt crisis rather than he left. we know that the new law will increase insurance costs and raise premiums for millions of americans. it will kill jobs and reduce wages. it will also raise the deficit. i know my democratic colleagues will point to the analysis of the health care bill to refute the statement.

we note that report has shortcomings. this court does not include the cost of fixing medicare payments. democrats show no stomach for offsetting the permanent fix. the score relies on gimmicks like offsetting four years of spending with eight years of revenue and the new law creates entitlement and body by the class act. on the education front, i would like to remind my colleagues that this is historically a bipartisan policy issue. given our current economic policy, it is a key tool to speed recovery. the most immediate action this congress can take is to reauthorize the workforce investment act to fill the jobs that will come on line as our economy recovers. we need to make sure our workers have the skills they need to be successful. i will look to the budget with his priority in mind. we have been working on this diligently. it could be done with relative ease.

being bipartisan does not mean writing a bill behind closed doors and then negotiating to reach the 60 votes needed to clear. and my hope is that the chairman's mark reflects priority is common on both sides of the aisle. otherwise, i fear this will be a party-line exercise and i cannot believe that is the change americans voted for two years ago. >> thank you. let me say before you begin how much i personally appreciate the extraordinary and productive work you have done with respect to health care reform. along with another senator, as well as your significant contributions on energy. for somebody who is not a chairman, to produce that amount

of work product highly professional work product, reflects very well on you. i appreciate your contributions. >> thank you very much. i do not want to make this a bouquet tossing contest but i especially want to note that i think the country would have been much better off if we had passed the conrad-gregg budget that we voted down earlier before. had that approach been passed, had we gotten those actors seven votes, it would have forced the congress this year, it was mandatory, to come to grips with the full range of touch -- of tough budget decisions that have to be made. we obviously hope that we will be able to do that but i think

that is illustrative of the kind of approach you and senator gregg had taken on these tough issues. although we did not get passed, i think the work you have all done is exactly what we still have to find a way to accomplish. i want to pick up by way of my opening remarks from what senator michael enzi just touched on. he correctly says we have to find a way to fix this. we all know that these tax breaks, these are expenditures. these are the people's money. everybody just filled out their 1040 form, this joyous experience, sense of their tax form into washington d.c., and in congress, we bit judgments about where that money should go. i want to say that i think

senator enzi is spot on. we have introduced comprehensive proposal that the heritage foundation, and i will admit that i do not quote them every day, my service in the senate, they said it would create 2 million new jobs and the library of congress says it does not add to the deficit. there is a substantial tax cut. we take away the tax breaks for shipping jobs overseas and use that money to slash rates and have a one page 1040 form. your point about laying a foundation for meaningful tax reform, boy is that overdue. when you look at this tax system, we now have things like reductions for punitive damages. you go through this system and

it is just breathtaking at how the people's money is being wasted through the tax code. i looked over to working with my colleagues and we have spent two years on this particular area. i think it will allow us to grow the economy. we had this big debate about value added tax. why don't we all come together and fix the current system that is so broken? i am absolutely certain we can grow the economy if we get these fundamental reforms in place. you and i have talked about this and i'm glad senator marie mentioned the veterans, as well. the pacific northwest has a huge number of veterans coming back. we are trying to transition. these folks have skills. we need people to fill law

enforcement jobs. we have military folks that can fill those positions. we have to make a handful of investment. forestry is an area at using about. that prevents the fires that we see. transportation, you give us an opportunity to america bonds program which is something that has generated more than $90 billion of investment in the structure while saving money. with the kind of bipartisan leadership the two of you showed and the effort to force cut the budget and spending in thousand 10, we can keep building on that. particularly to incorporate what senator enzi about with respect to tax reform, we can finish our work knowing we are laying the foundation for a brighter future. thank you. >> thank you. senator jim bunning. no, isn't senator sessions next?

i realized, to go which rules are you going by? >> we are going by the rule that senator sessions is only recognized after the markup is completed. that is a joke. senator sessions. at the marked up, we go in a pure seniority order. senator sessions is recognized and we will come over here to senator bunning. >> one of the things we lost sight of is that nothing comes from nothing. there is no way you can enjoy a benefit to date that has not cost somebody in the future.

we somehow think we can make unlimited investments which are another way of talking about spending and this will necessarily be a benefit in the long run. i remember the cbo's score on the stimulus package. during the time the money was spent, we would have economic improvement in what would otherwise be the case but they concluded that over 10 years, the economy would grow less than if no stimulus bill were passed at all. why is this so? because there were probably too generous. of the bill was poorly written. mainly it is true because it crowds out private borrowing. other people could have borrowed that money to create income and

so forth in their community. when the cover meant crowds out that bar wing, the money has to come from somewhere. it diminishes the economy and the growth. we had the testimony from an economist from the university of maryland. she has written a book about debt. when that reaches 90% of gdp, it resets -- it results in a reduction of 1% in gdp growth. if the economy is growing at 2% and you are actinide% of gdp growth, it will only grow at 1%. we verified that when she said

90% of gdp, she was not talking about just the public debt but the gross debt. we are very close to 90% of gdp as a percentage of the gross debt. this is a very serious matter. we are threatening our economy's health and a lot of different ways. nothing comes from nothing and we cannot continue to ignore the reality of the increasing debt. senator gregg mentioned the interest on that. last year, it was $170 billion. that means the first $170 billion dollars of tax revenue we had to use to pay the interest on the debt that we borrowed. that increases steadily under our current projections based on the president's budget of the fact the president's budget is effectuated in 2020, cbo says it

will be $840 billion. one year annual interest payment, $840 billion. this is so large that it will deny us monday that many of us would like to see for our highways, schools, health care, other things. it is going to crowd out spending for valuable things. it will instead take the money we are taxing the american people and have to pay it on interest. as was noted, the likelihood of such extensive borrowing costs and interest rates to exceed that is very real. they project some increases, 5% or so. right now, the prediction is 4% by the end of the year from their extraordinary low rates. we could be at a point where

these bills the be up to 9%. i am worried about where we are headed. 38% of the national savings last year was consumed by government borrowing. money that would normally be available for a business to borrow or a homeowner to borrow to buy a home or to expand a business and to hire people, that money is being consumed by the government. some would say that is fine. the government can do just as well as the private sector. i do not agree. some do not mind the trend we are on for extraordinary growth in the size of government is a

factor in the economy. i do oppose that. it is a deep feeling for me that we have too large of growth with spending and government. that is where i am hearing wherever we go. people think we are expanding out of control. we do not have the money so we spend more. we should spend less. our city has to worry about how we can pay our policeman. you guys are spending at record levels. counting the stimulus, spending has increased 80%. this is a huge increase. our baseline budget was a 30% increase. 35% for eps. a, this is unsustainable. let me say that i do believe that center greg and conrad are correct to tell us that our fundamental long-term

difficulties rest with the unsustainable actuarially unsound practices of social security and medicare. it is a fact that that is so. i believe until this year, and maybe this year with the economy being down, every bit of the debt that we are incurring is a result of discretionary spending is because of social security and medicare that has returned a modest but declining surplus. in the next year or two, there will be in-and will continue at a precipitous downward spiral. do not think that discretionary spending is not a factor in is that. -- in this debt. the deficits we are running fundamentally are part of the

deficit that has got to be part -- under control. i look forward to the discussion tomorrow and my amendment that would put statutory caps on the budget to make it harder to break our budget. if we can do that, it will be a good systemic reform. thank you. >> thank you. next is senator feingold. let me him -- thank him for his responsibility -- his commitment to fiscal responsibility. thank and for his strong support for trying to bring the deficit down. >> thank you. i congratulate you and your staff for once again crafting a budget resolution. it is a very tough task in the

effort made by you and your staff deserves all of our thanks. your resolution is a second as a response to requests by the administration that was handed the worst fiscal mess in our nation's history. we have seen some improvement in the last year but nobody should be unfurling mission accomplished signs just yet. unemployment is still a significant problem. businesses may be pre -- beginning to recover but there are still 15 million people who are officially unemployed and millions more working part time who want to work full time or are so discouraged that they have given up on looking. but we have to take steps to help businesses put people back to work. putting our economy on sound footing also means addressing the physical mess that the president largely inherited when he took office. over the next 10 years, the bulk of the massive prevention -- projected deficits come from the iraq and afghanistan wars. fiscally reckless tax policies

enacted in 2001 and 2003 and the effects of the worst recession since the great depression. the budget resolution that will be presented to committee starts to address that mess. we have to do more. tomorrow, i will offer an amendment to address one of the factors driving are projected deficit, namely the iraq afghanistan wars. that has cost trillions of dollars and it has not been offset. it has simply been added to the budget. i oppose the president's strategy in afghanistan. i think it hurts our ability to go after allocating it globally. if we continue these military operations, we should pay for them and avoid going deeper into debt and adding to the enormous burden we're asking our children and grandchildren to bear. i look forward to supporting other efforts for a more sustainable path. i want to close by joining you

and others bin commending our colleague from new hampshire. we entered the senate together at a time when deficit reduction was a priority. our freshman class brought some energy to that effort although there were many others that were committed to that action and it was very much a bipartisan enterprise. i was pleased to work with all of them on these efforts. i especially enjoyed working with you on this committee. we have worked on a number of proposals. when that happens, you may actually be about to change something. we're fortunate in being led in the budget by the two of you. the committee and the senate

will miss your service. this is a tough task and i look forward to tomorrow. >> thank you. next, we go to senator bunning. before he speaks, i want to remind members this will be senator bunninb'g's last markup. you will sincerely be missed. >> thank you. as almost all americans know by now, the u.s. is facing an unprecedented level of debt. the outlook for our debt is catastrophic and our children and my grandchildren, all 40 of them, are going to be left with the tab. last year, i pointed out that the budget would doubled in then

tripled in 10. the budget drives spending to $3.80 trillion in fiscal year 2011 and pushes the deficit to a new record level of $1.50 trillion in fiscal year 2010. both the congressional budget office and the chairman of the federal reserve have said that the debt of the u.s. is unsustainable. chairman bernanke and i do not often agree on many things. this one statement he has made, i heartily agree with. under the president's budget, the debt held by the public would grow from $7.50 trillion, 53% of gdp, to $20.30 trillion, 90% of gdp, by the end of 2020. as a result, interest costs on

borrowing with more than quadrupled by the end of the decade, reaching at least $840 billion in the year 2020. even this estimate is optimistic because it assumes that the spending levels will not cause us to lose our current aaa bond rating. these numbers are more than just frightening. the health care legislation that just passed by the congress and signed into law. when fully implement pfft about $2.60 trillion. to help pay for this bill, congress boroughs over $500 billion from the medicare program. medicare is going to be in solvent and it takes -- .

if further jeopardize the solvency of the program in the future of our children and grandchildren who will be stock footing the bill. -- stock footing the bill. we just passedpayg paygo legislation. that was that congress had to spend -- pay for what we spent like every body else. i knew it would be ignored and it has been. in just three bills since it has gone into effect, the majority has added almost $80 billion to the debt but the bottom line, congress is considering legislation that could make this amount go up even more. so much for paygo.

it is more like wave as you go and kicked the can down the road for future generations. i applaud the president's proposal of putting a freeze on concessionaries -- discretionary spending. however, freezing spending after the binge of last year which included such irresponsible measures like the $862 billion stimulus package means that we are freezing spending at a level that is already historical high. we should not view this move as anything more than a start. freezing discretionary spending for a few years will to nothing to address the looming entitlement crisis we are facing. according to the social security and medical board social security is projected to be facing deficits in 2016 and medicare will become insolvent in 2017.

however, as if it were not bad enough, the cbo released their own estimates indicating that social security will begin operating with a cash flow deficit this very year. a three-year freeze discretionary spending will do nothing to fix these problems at all. it is important. this is my last 32nd period. it is important but we have to do more. the longer we wait to address these problems, the harder it will be to fix them. everybody knows we cannot solve our debt crisis by spending more. that is exactly what the president's but it does. it spends more, tax is more, borrows more. enough is enough. it is time to cut up our national credit card and gets serious about paying down our debt. thank you, mr. chairman.

>> thank you for your service not only in this committee in the senate and the house before. senator nelson. before you start of a when we negotiated on a backup in case the proposal went down, there was no better support than bill nelson who went to a key meeting at the vice president's's residents with me and was tough as nails with respect to getting something that could actually lead to a vote if the commission is able to agree and senator nelson, i deeply appreciate that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. senator bunning, as you are departing, let the record show that the senator appreciates very much your public service and this particular senator will miss you.

but especially your wife. [laughter] if we had more to leadership in the senate like the two of you, we would be a lot smoother in our operation around here. you two model not only the personal friendship but the best of public service in how you get along working in a bipartisan way that is extremely in a partisan process. as the chairman of the science and space subcommittee, because space is bipartisan, but when you take something as partisan as a budget has become and the two of you model the kind of

leadership role we appreciate. we will miss you. i want to thank you mr. chairman because in order to make this budget work, what you have done is produce a revenue by closing some needed tax loopholes and although there might be a little bit of a shell game here, the fact is that you basically keep the deficit down to 3% of gross domestic product and that is a significant achievement and a very needed goal. thank you for that. in the process, you have a loud for a number of things that are

important to this senator -- the appropriate funding for one of the world's greatest treasures as we try to restore the everglades. likewise, on transportation projects such as high-speed rail and regional transportation. something that you even provide here that we have not been able to appropriate because it is costly and that is helping the widows and the orphans in the offset that occurs in a technical program known as survivor's benefit plan dependence indemnity compensation which is something that is important to our veterans and military retirees. thank you for that. i just want to make my closing comments by saying the president

went to the kennedy space center last thursday and gave a very visionary speech about the future of this nation's space program and how he has set the goal of mars and how he has spent specific timetables -- 2025 to land on an asteroid. a flyby of mars. eventually to mars. in all of the excitement and spinoffs and education results, engineering, mathematicians, scientists, technicians, that spins off from that program. the space program, because of a perceived lack of interest and lack of leadership, has been in near cardiac arrest. you have allowed, mr. chairman,

me to suggest to you, fortunately, you put in your mark, and additional cushion of $1 billion so that as we are confronting a program of testing a large diameter solid rocket motor which is critical to the department of defense and of which it is a good example of one hand of the federal government not knowing what the other hand is doing, the defense department and nasa and nasa goes in and cancels this test. i just came from having on the telephone a bunch of our senate arms services committee staff with dr. carter, one of the preliminary architects of the future defense needs of the

country. all of this is to say that you have allowed in this and the flexibility of continuing the testing for that big solid rocket motor called the the various 1 x -- aries 1 x, which is important for us to get out of low orbit but it will be critical to the solid rocket motors that protect this country cost national security and our submarines and silos and so forth. i want to thank you you for that. we have $1 billion over the fiscal year 2010 level.

if senator sessions were going to be here, he would be very happy to hear this because he has some interest in this not only from armed services but from his space center in alabama. >> with the senator yield on that point? there are classified discussions we cannot go into here with respect to this initiative. but i would say to my colleagues that this is absolutely essential for the national security that to this go forward. i think every member of this committee to understand what i am talking about. i very much hope that this will be retained and we will have to fight for this. >> senator mike crapo, thank you

for your contributions to this committee. always substantive answers member and we appreciate it. >> thank you. i reflect that sentiment, as well. i know there has been some discussion over the last few months of whether we were going to have a markup on a budget. i appreciate the fact you have made a decision to move forward and let us engage in this debate and hopefully to produce it bought -- a solid budget document. i have to say i am concerned about the budget that is going to be proposed. we have not seen the mark up yet. i was carefully looking at your cards and making sure i understand what you're going to do. if i understand correly, it is going to be very similar to the president of budget proposals and most of my remarks are going to be and what i do know about the president's proposal. those are the concerns that i am going to raise. i hope we are able to make some

difference. the reason i say that is because as i look at the proposal we have seen, it is more spending, more debt, more deficit, more government, less in terms of the smaller economy and lost prosperity. i believe this congress must stop following the philosophy that we can spend ourselves into prosperity. that is like thinking you can drink yourself sober. we have got to start facing up to the difficult issues that we face fiscally. what do i mean when i talk about that? i will be focused on that cbo report did not get much attention because it was as we were analyzing the health care bill and in middle of the final actions on the health care debate. it did not get a lot of national or congressional attention. what did the cbo report say? by 2010, under the budget, the

deficit will reach 5.6% of gdp and never dipped below four. -- 4% to the entire budget window. under the president's budget, the debt held by the public would grow from $7.50 trillion or 53% of gdp at the end of 2009 to $20.30 trillion or 90% of gdp by the end of 2020. about $5 trillion more than the assumptions in the baseline. if we do nothing but maintain our current posture, we would be $5 trillion better. that interest would more than quadrupled between 2010 and 2020 and swell to 4.1%. there will be more spending. government will grow. i see virtually no entitlement reform.

none. the amount of discretionary spending reform, as has been indicated, is represented by a $4 billion reductionin international accounts. there is talk about the freeze in the budget and i appreciate the fact there is a proposed freeze. i hope as we see the mark up the that this will be backed up with caps on spending that will be enforced procedurally. the freeze is a freeze at levels that have been increased in the discretionary budget by 70% -- 17%. we have blown out spending at a 17% increase when all americans have been cutting their budgets. what has happened in congress? we have blown the budget up. and now we're going to freeze it.

at least i am glad we're freezing it and i am glad we're not talking about another 7% or 8% addition this year. we have got to do better. in addition, less growth. looking at the report that i wish got more attention, for 2016 through 2020, the cbo estimate is the president's proposal would lower by 0.2% on average. we will have a smaller economy while facing this growing debt and growing spending. the supply side effects of the president's policy would probably lower output between 2016 and 2020. the policies would result in a smaller stock of domestically owned capital, mainly as a consequence of the increased deficit and that effect become stronger overtime as budget deficits accumulate. each year between 200010 and

2020, -- 2010 and 2020, national saving would be reduced. i think that we have to do a lot better. i do appreciate some of the steps in the budget and i want to work with you to strengthen them. you mentioned the middle class tax cuts. i am glad to identify those. those are the tax cuts that i believe we enacted in 2001 and 2003. we debated over since that time over whether that was a tax on the wealthy or not. the budget now enologist at $619 billion of them were tax cuts for the middle-class. i am glad you're budget to tax those cuts. but does not mean people's tax rates are going to go down. we will stop them from going up. the credit and responsibility for that effort should be appropriately place.

i think pay-as-you-go should have tougher protections. i wish it would protect -- we should have more flexibility for tax relief and not have to subject all tax relief to those provisions. i understand the argument by those who do not want to say efforts to cut taxes be given a more favorable treatment. i would also remind us that as we have pay-as-you-go rules, we must honor them. i have not gone back and counted the votes but i think we may have waived pay go more than we have honored it at this -- as it has happened. there is a two--- 8 $2 billion

deficit. we had a $2 billion reconciliation construction last year and what we got from that to dollar billion reconciliation instruction was say 2.6 trillion dollar increase in spending and hundreds of billions of dollars of their taxes. i do not mean to go back and debate that again but that entire proposal was able to be implemented because of a small to dollar billion instruction. i am over my time. i do say that as a member of that commission, i look forward to working with you and others on that. i hope we can get some more on that. i hope we can start the progress -- process of meaningful reform. >> thank you. senator debbie stabenow, thank you for your steadfast work on this committee.

we could not have a better ally then senator debbie stabenow. i serve on three committees with their. she is a major player. your middle name should be jobs. nobody is more focused on that than the senator from michigan. >> thank you. thank you so much for putting together a budget that is solid and focuses on our values and priorities and the wife or all of your wonderful work. i want to thank senator gregg when he comes back again because even though we did not agree on many items, i very much appreciate his fairness and leadership. i have talked about this before but i feel compelled to take us back to 2001 when i first came on the budget committee. we were debating the largest budget surplus in the history of

our country. it was brought about because of president clinton and balancing the budget. it was focused on innovation and investing in people and families and small businesses. we created almost 23 million jobs. but be focused on priorities that middle-class families care about. at that time, we heard from colleagues that deficits do not matter. we heard that the tax cuts and the ones we're concerned about were able to be put into place without paying for them. i remember at the time that an alternative was proposed that if we had done, we would not be here today. you suggested at the time we take that surplus and we divided

into thirds. 1/3 to invest in middle-class tax cuts, business, if there to invest in the people and innovation, education, health care, jobs, and a third to prepay the deficit going forward on social security. that is the democrats' proposal at the time. as i hear colleagues who supported the policies that got us into this mess now coming forward, and i know we will hear this on every single amendment and over and over again, i just want to remind us that in 2001, but we had another choice, another road. i would argue it would have taken us to a much better place for the country and one and one i was proud to support with you. i want to say that i want to

join with colleagues. we may not agree on the debates in terms of the budget but i have a genuinely enjoyed working with you and appreciate your fairness and i want to thank you for that. the reality is this. in terms of where we have been, the mass that president obama inherited and going forward, last year, the economy was on life-support. we were going over the cliff. not only because of tax policies and spending policies put together medicare prescription drug for not paid for, hearing over and over from the vice

president that the deficit does not matter, we were at the brink of a catastrophe coupled with no oversight on wall street that happened during that same period of time. we have now walked that back to the president obama came into office with a hundred thousand jobs being lost every month. we put into place the recovery act. i have a different different -- i have a very different view of the recovery act coming from michigan. your continued advanced manufacturing tax credits that is actually creating jobs in michigan. 14 different companies are investing and making american products. they are creating jobs. we have approximately 150 companies across the country that have received that the manufacturing tax credits in the recovery act along with a number of other important job provisions. it would be great to say the

government was borrowing so there was not money for the private market. private markets were frozen. there was no credit. if it had not been at the recommendation of every conservative and republican economist that we are hearing from to be able to create capital and opportunities for growth, i would hate to see where we were given the fact that one year ago, it was almost a hundred thousand jobs lost per month. mr. chairman, i appreciate that because we do not get out of this whole if we cannot go out of work. that is why we are where we are. i am a very grateful for your focus and for president obama's focus and our focus together on

jobs to get people back to work. unfortunately, during the last eight years, with the policies represented and advocated for five republican colleagues, the bush budget helped corporations who outsource jobs. this budget helps businesses that create good jobs here at home to get us back on track. the bush budget ran up huge deficits to pay for tax cuts for if you -- for a few wealthy people. this is responsible for cutting budgets for our -- cutting deficits for our children and grandchildren. the bush budget cut education budgets. this will help us invest in our children which is so critical. this budget focuses on our great american middle class and our small businesses who create the majority of jobs in this country. that is why i am a very grateful for all of your efforts in

investing in those areas and i am also very appreciative for including president obama's national export initiative which is also about jobs and for efforts i hope we can all agree on to create more markets for manufacturers, for agriculture, and to create jobs here at home and export our products. i also appreciate the fact that the budget includes funding for trade enforcement and we have a level playing build on trade. i also want to thank you for something important to me and those of us in great lakes, continuing the commitment of $475 million for great lakes restoration. . .

>> focusing on creating jobs, focusing on middle-class families, supporting small businesses, and frankly, continuing to clean up the mess that we have been laughed. thank you. >> we will go -- think you for your serious minded commitment to the work of this committee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would add complement's to both of you. a lot of committees don't work the way -- there are real differences in philosophy on this committee, but we have serious debate and we have serious debate in a way that is

constructive serious debate. it does not get personal. i attribute that to the way the u.s. senator gregg works together. i applaud both of you the way -- not just what we do here in the committee, you handle when we go to the floor and a very professional manner. i want to address a few other things and go back to history just a little bit. there were a few facts that were left out. i opposed a lot of the spending that happened under president bush. i opposed whether it was the prescription drug bill, the farm bill, or some other spending. you do have to go back and look at exactly what happened. it was a republican congress with bill clinton that got us to balanced budgets and surpluses because we held the line on spending as the economy grew. in 2001, we had a devastating -- we were questionable on the

economy a little bit at that point, and then we had 9/11. we have to understand that took $1 trillion out of the economy. it does not excuse the increase in spending that we had. i criticized the bush administration and the republican congress at the time for doing that. that is the past. that is still the past. as legislators, what are we going to do. we can play the blame game all we want, but what are we going to do now for the future of the united states. the actual future of our country is on the line, and it is not 10 years out that we used to think, tenor 20 years from now, we will have budget problems.

we're looking at this year, over $200 billion of interest payments on our national credit card. $200 billion is money that can't go to education, roads, health care, anything else we want to do. by the end of the decade, we're talking almost a trillion dollars in interest payments on the debts. those numbers don't include it increased rates on the bill, or if we get downgraded by rating agencies. if we get downgraded, we're heading to that place. we're heading toward a banana republic as far as the agencies are concerned. the interest rates skyrocket. we have to look at this thing as legislators and say, how do we stop this catastrophe, the economic catastrophe that could be upon us. as one of the reasons the debt

commission has serious work to do. we have a responsibility. we can't wait several years. we need to get serious. a couple billion dollars here and there is not going to cut it when you talk about a trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see. when you are adding that much debt, it is like a family that says, you know what? we can't afford the interest payments today, but we're going to continue to just spend and spend, add to the family credit card, and eventually we know we will end up in bankruptcy, but we're not going to do anything. state governments, local governments, across the board, family businesses, families are tightening their belts. the only place that isn't tightening its belt is washington d.c.. i am sure all of us have been visited by these close-up

students. it is great to see young people learning about our government. they asked me about help with schools. i said, you know, i would love to be able to help the schools and we will probably do that in the supplemental bill. the problem is we are borrowing from their very future, the money that we will be sending to the states. we are printing the money, and somebody has to pay that money back with interest, and those young people that are standing before me are great deal of who is going to have to pay it back. they will not have the same kind of america because of the debt burden. i don't care whether you're a family, business, local government, state government, local government, too much debt will destroy you. that is where we are headed. in the old testament, there are plenty of scriptures about too much debt. we are in that situation today, and we have to make serious

choices. they are not easy. it is easier to get reelected if you are giving money away. it is difficult to say we're going to cut spending in areas. unless this committee or this congress gets serious, not two years or three years from now, starting now, getting serious about cutting spending, we are not going to do it. we can go back and forth about the blame game. the responsibility is ours for the future of the united states. i think this committee has important work to do, and i hope we can lead the rest of the congress into making very serious and tough choices. >> senator cardin, we're very fortunate to have somebody of your background and knowledge on this committee. i am appreciative of your willingness to serve here. >> i want to echo the comments that have been voiced on both sides of the aisle to

congratulate the leadership of this committee. senator conrad has done a very good job under very difficult economic circumstances at bringing forward a budget that reflects, i think, the right priorities during a difficult -- a difficult economic time. they have worked with great professionalism, and the quality of the debate is a model as to what we should be doing in the united states senate. i applaud them for making it a pleasure to serve on the committee. it is not true too often in many of our committees. i want to agree with senator and set on a couple of points. i agree that the deficit is a very serious situation, and we need to work for it. thank you, mr. chairman, your budget has done that. it has taken the deficit we have currently had and reduces it by 2/3 over the next five years. you have done it by taking the

tough steps, including freezes on domestic discretionary spending, including living up to our pay-as-you-go rules, including denying a lot of the things that people would like to see us do but are not high priority. but it is doable. what you're asking us to do, we can achieve. we can reduce the deficit by 2/3 over the next five years. i want to take exception with the comment that senator and san may. i don't want to look back because we have to look forward. i have to correct the record, because i was part of congress in 1993. i was one of the democratic votes that allowed us to bring our budget and debt balance. we didn't get a single vote from the republicans in the house or the senate. it was tough medicine, and cost some members of their seats. but it was our responsibility to do that.

we brought 2000 to a surplus situation. i didn't vote for the policies that led to the deficit. i didn't vote for the tax cuts and the vote and the vote -- and the wars that were not paid for. we have to take responsibility for solving the problem. i applaud you, mr. chairman, the budget that responsibly deals with the budget deficit. you do it in a way that also creates jobs, and that is how we get out of this economic problem, by protecting the environment and improving our economy, improving educational opportunities. these are priorities we should be able to agree to because we need to be competitive in our international environment. mr. chairman, i want to thank you for working with my staff as we incorporate into the budget a lot of priorities that are important to me. i chair the water and wildlife subcommittee at the department

of public works committee. the senator mentioned a great lakes program -- it late -- great lakes program. that is good for jobs because you have increased the state revolving fund for the infrastructure by $3.50 billion. it creates over 20,000 jobs, so we're not only going to have these water main breaks stopped , just a short distance from here it became river, and more recently had a flood in baltimore county, we can get to those types of problems. he also provided money for the chesapeake bay program to improve the chesapeake bay program and to reauthorize the infrastructure financing act. those are provided bork for -- and those are provided for by reserve funds. we are all interested in health

care and reducing costs. i have brought to the attention that the dealing with minority disparity will reduce health- care costs. hundreds of billions of dollars are spent because we did not deal half -- with the health disparity in this country. the congress accepted an amendment that i offer that elevates the center for minority health -- to an institute. this budget that comes forward provides the resources to make that a reality. thank you, mr. chairman. it is the right thing to do, and it will also save money. in 13 years, when this arbitrary cap was put in, it hurts people that need not -- that he held the most. one last point i want to mention that is a small business administration. for eight years in the bush administration, the budget was basically flat.

they did not help small businesses, the engine of drop -- job growth in america. it is what we need for creativity and innovation. last year, the offer was accepted by this committee to raise the budget by $180 million. and this year, to have increased by 75 million, i think you for that. it is the key to our economic success, helping small businesses. this budget speech to the priorities during tough economic times. it speaks about jobs and fiscal responsibility. i think you very much for your leadership. >> would you like additional time? [laughter] senator grassley, you will only be recognized if you have something nice to say about the chairman and the ranking member. [laughter] seriously. [laughter]

>> senator grassley is somebody who knows that i have the highest regard for. because senator grassley has demonstrated to me in times when it was very tough to keep his word, he kept his word to me on something absolutely essential. and i tell you, rarely do you see somebody of that basic honor. senator grassley. >> i will yield you some more time. that is kind of you. i would also like to express accolades as everybody else has for senator -- the senator from new hampshire because it is people like him you can -- that give public-service a good name. when you have somebody like him retire, it is going to give a big vacuum. i wish you were retiring, but you're entitled to your own

decisions and whenever life you want from here on out. but public service will be harmed because there are not people like you are around. a year ago when this committee met to mark up the budget resolution, we were confronted with an astoundingly irresponsible budget. during that time, we of heard a lot about how these massive deficits and debts were in heritage from the previous administration. we continue to hear that these claims, even though the congressional democratic majorities in 2007 and 2008 played a leading role in creating deficits that president obama inherited, and as was predicted at the time, president obama was turning the course to double and triple his inheritance. one year later, did president obama propose a budget that will change course and reduce

spending and reduce deficits? i don't think so. in fact, just the opposite. this budget is shocking because it repeats the mistakes of his last pass the budget. it is kind of groundhog day once again. it puts us on a path of rising deficits as far as the eye can see. publicly held federal that grows from less than 6% of our economy today to 90% by 2020. that is an alarming increase from the post world war two average of about 40%. annual deficits over the next 10 years never drop below 700 billion. we will likely have three consecutive budgets that are each over a trillion dollars in deficit. this budget makes a trillion dollar deficit the norm. there is no effort to rein in spending, and it is unsustainable. it is a one-way ticket to the debt problems being experienced

by the governments of greece. while the budget last year was claimed to be inherited, this budget is a wholly owned by president obama, and the people that pass it in this congress, which think will be mostly or entirely the majority party. the obama budget more than doubles publicly held federal that in seven years. they are estimated at more than 4% of our gdp. a few years ago, you, chairman conrad, spoke of the previous administration budget that would push up interest rates and retard economic growth. you describe them as threatening the long-term economic security of the country with debt that would take the nation many generations to recover. those statements, and that they were alarming statements, were made with annual deficits were one-fifth of what they are under this budget.

we never envisioned annual deficit -- deficits of a trillion dollars year after year when you referred to the crippling debts of just a few years ago. now we have had two consecutive budgets from this president that increased taxes, increase spending, and increase the debt. these policies will leave a mountain of debt to our children and grandchildren and have the potential to bankrupt our country. i hope the former federal reserve chairman volcker, a key adviser on fiscal policy gave us an honest assessment of how this administration and the congressional democratic leadership want to tackle fiscal problems facing the nation. to make up for the largest levels of spending in the deficits in modern history, the administration is laying the foundation for a large misguided the new tax for the first time, an american value added tax.

they have said much of the same thing. if the president wants to add a completely new layers of taxation, then he should take this issue for the american people when he runs for reelection. the administration in the democratic leadership are asking the american taxpayer to make up for their inability to do what any responsible american household does, live within their means. we should be keeping taxes low, reducing government spending and the deficit. these actions must be taken if we have any chance of providing the same level of economic prosperity for future generations. thank you, mr. chairman. the >> we may disagree on the analysis of the history and how we got here, but again, when we don't disagree on is one thing i want to say publicly, how much i appreciate the seriousness that you bring to your job, and

the decency that you bring to your job. >> those are kind words, i think you very much. senator white house, thank you for all the energy that you bring to this committee. and also, the background dealing with complex financial matters, because you have made a significant contribution here. >> i appreciate it. i want to begin by applauding your continued leadership as our nation begins to recover from the worst economic downturn of our lifetime. i also wish ranking member greg well on his last budget procedure. we will miss you. 13 months ago, when we met to consider the budget resolution for the current fiscal year, the economy was in peril. unemployment was climbing up to 700,000 jobs lost by americans every month.

the stock market had plummeted to a level not seen in more than a decade. bank lending had virtually frozen. economic anxiety pervaded the nation. president obama was just on the job for two months. we are by no means out of the woods just yet, but before turning to work that needs to be done, we should remark on the progress we have made over the last year. the recovery act has already supported between 2.2 and 2.8 million jobs. helping first to stop and begin to reverse our serging and unemployment. indeed, the two year long climb on unemployment has been halted as the national rate is once again below 10%, although in rhode island, it is hovering just under 13%. as the economy it has stabilized, investor confidence has recovered.

much of the value that had evaporated has been made back over the past year. on the data recovery act was signed into law, the dow jones industrial average closed over 7500. yesterday, it closed at 11,000. it did require borrowing to counteract the inherited meltdown, tightening belts is the wrong analogy in the middle of an economic contraction. if we followed that advice, we would probably be in a second depression now. in addition to the economic gains of the past 12 months, i would be remiss if i did not acknowledge the health care legislation that ensure that all americans have access to affordable, quality health care. the primary economic anxiety for many families in rhode island and around the country is obtaining and retaining health insurance coverage for their loved ones. the affordable health care law will insure the citizens -- they

finally have access to quality, affordable health care coverage. while the progress has been substantial, many parts of the country continue to suffer through recession level of employment. again, unemployment in my state of rhode island stands at 12.6%. the recession started earlier than most places, and the suffering has been deeper. i am pleased that the resolution includes a jobs reserve fund that will provide us with procedural flexibility in passing legislation and extending assistance for the unemployed. as most of you surely know, mother nature hit rhode island hard with the worst flooding since the great september gale of 1815. 3000 rhode island people are out of work because of the storms, and the uncovered damages to state and local government will likely reach into the hundreds of millions. we're a small state. it for us, those are big

numbers. i plan to offer an amendment that will expand funds to cover flood prevention and legislation to bolster the failing dams. i hope that my colleagues will support this language and help provide assistance for the flood victims in my state. the chair in's resolution will complement many of president obama's budget priorities, from maintaining the tax credit and shielding middle-class americans from the amt, to supporting programs and providing for investments in science, education, and health care. it also follows the president's request to freeze discretionary spending for the next three years. as americans are forced to reexamine their budgets, so, too, should our government. i hope my colleagues see this freeze as a way to cut duplicative spending and make the government run more efficiently. i am pleased to serve on the task force that the chairman established on this committee,

chaired by senator warner. i look forward to exploring efficiency opportunities as the work of the task force continues. i want to end on a cautionary note for anyone intent on framing the president of the budget as fiscally irresponsible. a conversation about who is responsible for the budget deficit is one that i am quite prepared to have. president clinton left president bush an annual budget surplus, and budget trajectory predicted by cbo to eliminate the federal that and leave the completely debt-free america by 2009. we could be going into the second year of a completely debt-free america. but the irresponsible policies of the bush administration changed all that. $1.30 trillion went towards the wealthy, a prescription drug that it -- a prescription drug benefit to line the pockets of big pharma, and regulatory

failures that led to near financial collapse all put us where we are today. i am ready to engage in that conversation. i hope that we will choose instead to put the rhetoric aside and work together on a constructive budget with appropriate attention both to spending and revenue. we owe it to our constituents to do our best to restore prosperity to the economy and balanced the budget. i commend you, mr. chairman for your leadership. i look forward to going back to brighter budget days. >> allowed people listening to know that center whitehouse and senator reid made a powerful presentation to our caucus on the flooding in rhode island. i won the center to know that the history of this body is to stand shoulder to shoulder with colleagues and with the people of the affected states when they have a disaster. and clearly, rhode island has

had a very serious natural disaster. you, senator white house and senator reid, as i said, made one of the most impassioned presentations on a natural disaster hitting a state that i have heard in my 24 years here. and that has been hurt by colleagues, and it will be responded to. >> i think you, chairman. >> i had a chance to welcome him to the committee when he wasn't here. i had a chance to say how -- i want a chance to say how much we enjoy your sense of fiscal responsibility, and it has made an impression on your colleagues, certainly on me. i deeply appreciate the sense of fiscal responsibility of brought to the united states senate. i knew you were mayor back home in alaska, and you know what it is to balance budgets.

it takes tough choices. and we have started the process here of making tough choices. i am proud of the fact we have brought the deficit down during the five years of this budget from almost 10% of gdp down to 3%, which virtually all economists say what is necessary to stabilize the debt. i am swift to say that we have to do more, that is why this deficit reduction commission is so important. there was no stronger ally in getting that commission put into place then the senator from alaska. >> thank you for those comments in your right. once you have been a mayor, you know you have to balance everything out at the end of the day. it is an important process. thank you for the opportunity to serve here on the committee. the new members of the budget committee, i am pleased to have the opportunity to work with all of you in the coming days, and the chairman's proposal which is

rooted in fiscal present -- fiscal discipline will also provide middle-class tax relief. i applaud the chairman for striking the right balance between putting this on the path of fiscal financial health, and programs that spur economic growth, alaskans and all americans expect us to do two things in terms of fiscal responsibility. first, reduce government spending, and a second, cut the deficit so that tax dollars are put back into the pockets of hard-working americans like the fishermen or the small business owner in anchorage. americans expect us in congress to reduce the deficit so their grandchildren have a more promising fiscal future. they need us to provide immediate relief. what i like most about the proposal in the proposed budget that encompasses just that, extends a helping hand to people that are simply trying to make a

living and also cuts the deficit. when i first got to washington, we were facing the greatest economic crisis since the great depression. it was tough for all of us to go back home and explain why another car dealership has shut down or why another neighbor was facing foreclosure. i was troubled by the enormous level of debt facing this and future generations. today's unprecedented 13 trillion dollars in federal that did not suddenly appear last year or with this administration. it is a result of years of failing to pay for two wars, tax cuts for the wealthy, and spending to prevent the economy from tail spinning into a depression. >> 800,000sunemployment reacheda staggering 8.8 on the -- the highest in almost two decades. they are slowly climbing out of this devastating fiscal crisis.

as of march 2010, we have gained 162,000 jobs to move our economy in the right direction. the president signed into law a package of measures, which will help thousands of alaskans and millions of americans go back to work. when congress passed the first of several jobs bills, the law business expanded, hired workers, and just started infrastructure projects, including many in my home state of alaska. it includes $671 billion more in deficit reduction the president goes a budget. it also cuts taxes for the middle-class and investing in education that will lay the foundation for a long-term economic security. as a member of the veterans affairs committee, the highest number of veterans per-capita, i am proud the proposal makes our service members and veterans top

priority, and it addresses the inequities. it also repeals the offset the penalizes service members that unjustly allow benefits to work against each other. it also ensures that the va can provide the highest quality of care for the veterans. there is a 7.4% increase. the budget proposal adopt the funding levels and highway safety programs. it gives money to the faa and provides $200 million in air service program that served 45 communities in alaska. alaska is unique in that it has some of the most remote rural communities in the nation. the budget recognizes the importance of the bureau and whirl -- rowlock -- role waters. many alaskan natives are facing a public crisis.

the chairman's proposal has provided $4.40 billion for health services to improve quality health care facilities, services, and $255 million for public safety and justice programs. >> it provides 700 million in native american housing grants. i am proud to work on a budget that puts america on a strong, -- a strong fiscal course that allows people to retain their hard-earned money. we must continue to focus on enforcing fiscal discipline and cutting the deficit. it is clear that america is getting back on track. the 700 billion authorized by the bush administration for the tarp program, $148 million will be cancelled by the chairman's proposal. this process will be ongoing and will help cut the deficit. a strongly support the long-term

changes necessary to reduce the federal debt. that is what tomorrow i will introduce an amendment that will direct all remaining tar buddy towards the deficit other than about $30 billion set aside for small business lending. this proposal is about jobs, deficit-reduction, providing tax relief for hard-working middle- class families. again, thank you, chairman conrad. think for the opportunity to serve on the committee. >> i think the senator very much for his comments, and i especially thank him for doing this committee and bring his perspective to it. i just want to conclude today by saying that others have given their analysis of how we have gotten to where we are today. i want to give mine. i believe that if we look back over the last decade, we had an overly loose fiscal policy under

control of the congress and the president of the united states. the debt doubled during the previous administration, and those were during good times. we also had, at that same time, the monetary policy under control of the federal reserve. it is very unusual in economic history to see simultaneously an overly loose fiscal policy and an overly loose monetary policy. on top of it all, we had the regulations in a way that led to extraordinarily risky financial instruments, and i am primarily thinking of derivatives that led to the complete bankruptcy of aig and indeed for a federal bailout which, had it not been done, this was done by the previous administration.

remember that tarp was done in the previous administration. had aig not been rescued, we would be in a global depression today. had the steps taken by the federal reserve and the previous administration and this administration to provide liquidity, i believe we would be in a global depression today. i think economic history will confirm that view. but the responsibility for the overly loose fiscal policy, that did not happen on this administration's watch. they inherited a doubling of the debt that occured. they inherited a deficit because of the precipitous economic down client that with any previous administration. they inherited a deficit of $1.30 trillion. it is true that they added to it in order to provide liquidity to prevent a complete collapse.

what was done was absolutely imperative to avoid a global financial collapse. i believe there was widespread responsibility. an overly loose fiscal policy under the responsibility of the federal reserve, an overly loose fiscal policy, control of congress and the president, it treated the seedbed for bubbles to form. and it was not just the housing bubble. we also had the energy bubble. we had a commodity bubble. it went over $20 a bushel.

bubbles to form and bubble burst, and when they do, there is enormous economic wreckage. this administration got stuck with cleaning it up. where i would fault this administration. they inherited the debt -- the devastation. because, well, the deficit comes down in the first five years quite sharply. where i would fall to them is the second five years. and that is why the fiscal commission, i believe, is critically important. i would applaud the administration for coming forward with the fiscal

commission after center greg and my proposal to have the statutory commission did not get the supermajority vote necessary. that is where we are. i believe that when the history of this time is written, the steps taken by the previous administration, when the collapse was occurring, and the follow-up steps by this administration in the federal reserve were absolutely essential to avert a global financial collapse. it is also true that we now have to pitch. we now have to pick it and focus on deficits and debt like a laser. the question before us is, what is the right timing to make that pivot. i don't believe it is this year. i wish it were. we still have almost 10% unemployment, one in every six

workers in this economy that says they are unemployed or underemployed. most economists tell me that we could have a double-dip recession. that would be a disaster. i also believe deeply, we have got to give it very soon. i don't think this year is the time. adding soon thereafter, it is the time. we have to take the spending side of the equation, which does have to be dealt with, and we have to take on the revenue side as well. the harsh reality is that the revenue structure in this country is inefficient, it is not allowing for the full competitive strength of the united states, and it is also

not fair. we don't have a fair distribution of the burden. i would say to my colleagues, now is the time. we have got to put in place a plan that makes sense for the economic reality of this year, and we have got to begin the pivot to aggressively go after death -- that's. this budget attempts to do both. senator sanders, welcome. it is good to have you here. the nisei the country owes you a deep debt of gratitude for your devotion to community health centers. your strong advocacy has led to a very substantial investment in community health centers, not only in the budget last year, but in the health care bill. i believe it will pay dividends in that -- and for the people of this country for many years to

come. it would not have happened without you. >> that is very kind to you, and i apologize for being late. thank you for putting together the budget that you did, there is a lot of hard work that that entailed. what is interesting about the process that we're going for right now is that we have an opportunity in a way that many other committees don't to take a hard look at national priorities. this is called a national priorities committee. where we're spending money that we shouldn't be spending? where are we not spending money that we should? how do we ways -- and raise revenue and equitable way? these are issues that we wrestle with. the take a little bit different bent -- and then some of my colleagues. we are in the midst of the worst recession since the great depression of the 1930's.

it means 17% of the people are either unemployed or underemployed as a result of the greed and recklessness and illegal behavior of wall street. millions of people have lost their jobs, lost their homes, lost the ability to send their kids to college. it is an absolute disaster. we can't let anything without understanding that reality. some people say, we have been spending money lately. we have been spending money in order to pull this country out of the major economic crisis, and we appear to be having some success in doing that. number one, we are in the midst of a major recession. what else? this country has enormous needs out there. i was recently at a meeting of the health committee. we had a guy from the oecd that

does education. this country, in many respects, is falling behind young people and the rest of the world in terms of graduation rates for high school and college. we're not going to compete if our educational system is not up to par. we had fewer manufacturing jobs that we have had. how we become a great economy of we're not producing the products that we need? i don't know how you do that. in terms of the needs of our kids, in many ways, the judge and nation on how it treats its youngest people. we have the highest rate of child part -- the poverty of any child country -- of any big country on earth. we don't invest in early education. with more people in jail than china does, than any other country on earth. for a country with a glass, we

have more people in jail. our infrastructure is crumbling right now. how'd you become a great nation if we don't have roads and bridges, a transportation system that we need. everybody knows that we have well over $1 trillion in terms of infrastructure and transportation. those are some of the needs that are out there. but there is a question that don't think anyone has touched on. it seems to be an issue we're not allowed to talk about, the distribution of wealth and income. are we allowed to talk about that issue? the top 1% earns more income than the bottom 50%. how do you not talk about that? we have the top 1% owning more wealth than the bottom 90%. with the most unequal distribution of wealth and then come than any major country on earth. natalie is that immoral and

wrong, it is bad economics. when so few have so much in so many have so little, you create the kind of spending patterns that you want. those are some of the issues that we have got to address. what do i think? i think that number one, my view is that this budget does not go far enough in terms of investing in america. i'll go further. i will be offering amendments to do just that. where do we get the money? i will tell you where we begin to get some of that money. i find it ron that you have a situation where warren buffett who has been before this committee, he tells us that he pays a lower effective tax rate than does his secretary. this is the third richest guy in the world. somebody tell me that that makes

any sense of all. i have a situation where last year, exxon mobile, the most profitable corporation in the history of the world not only did not pay any federal income taxes, but received a tax fund last year in part by setting up tax shelters in the cayman islands. i recall that lovely chart with the thousands of companies. a little bit crowded in one building, there. when you talk about investing in america, were we getting the money? that is a pretty good place to start. none of my republican colleagues are here. but i find it a little bit amusing to say the least, that without exception, they tell us how serious the deficit situation is, and i agree that is a very serious problem. and they have voted to repeal the estate tax. and i right? i believe virtually every

republican voted for that. the vote to repeal the estate tax, over 10 years, it provides one trillion dollars in tax breaks to the top 0.3%. here we have a situation where some folks voted for war that cost us $2 or $3 trillion. they voted for a medicare prescription voted -- written by insurance companies. now we're being lectured on how to deal with the deficit. the bottom line is, i think, if this middle-class is going to survive, and there is a real question about whether that will be the case, we've got to invest in the needs of this country. we cannot allow ourselves to become a second-rate nation. when we invest in

infrastructure, education, energy, we will create millions of good paying jobs. the way you raise the revenue to do that is ask the wealthiest people in this country who have got a huge tax breaks in recent years to start paying their fair share of taxes. the other area, we don't talk about this much. take a look at the military budget. this budget that we're talking about right now spends, as i understand it, twice as much on defense than on domestic and on security discretionary spending like education, energy, the environment, labor. are we allowed to talk about it, or is the military industrial complex too strong? we'll be offering amendments as this process continues, and a thank-you for your hard work. >> thank you for the energy and

the intellect that you bring to the task. we appreciate it very much. let me indicate that we are going to now recess until tomorrow morning at 9:00, please have members here -- please have your members here if they have amendments. it is going to be our intention to have to crotches of amendments tomorrow. senator gregg and i have talked about one contract at about 12:00 or 1230. we will conclude on that tomorrow and we're back here. and a second later in the afternoon, we will figure it out based on the number of amendments that we have when that is best timed. senator gregg and i felt that late in the afternoon it might work best.

we'll see how many amendments we have. with that, i want to thank all members have participated today, and i look forward to a day of amendments tomorrow. we'll stand in recess until 9:00 a.m.. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> tonight on c-span, national security advisor james jones, an hour interview with the former ambassador to afghanistan, zalmay khalilzad. in the senate budget committee works on the annual budget resolution. on tomorrow's "washington journal," new york times newlouise story and kara scannell of the "wall street journal." indelicate independent voters that this year's alexian with usa today reporter richard wolfe. "washington journal" is live thursday 7:00 a.m. eastern on c- span. >> we still have a vast

workforce out there with some people i can't read, can't work, can't compete, and many of the people that would be in the work force, we have to do more from them. >> the c-span video library features 115,000 unique individuals. every day, and adds new faces to politicians, the exporters, and politicians that you can follow. every program since 1987 available on the c-span video library. >> now, national security adviser james jones. he spoke at the twenty fifth anniversary for the washington institute for middle east policy. topics include the wars in afghanistan and iraq. iran's nuclear program, and the arab-israeli conflict. >> a good evening.

good evening and welcome to this very special event. this is the washington institute's twenty fifth anniversary celebration. the gala cocktail reception is the opening of our symposium. welcome. [applause] on behalf of the staff, the fellows, the board, the directors, alumni, friends, i am just delighted to look around and see some many wonderful people from throughout the country and all corners of the washington community here to join with us tonight in celebrating be jubilee of the washington institute. welcome. i would like to open tonight's festivities, since this is effective moment, on a brief somber note. witches, for us, to rise for a

moment of silence in honor of the women and men of the u.s. armed forces and the armed forces of our allies throughout the world who are engaged in daily battles, daily efforts on behalf of our nation, our friends, and our allies. thank you. 25 years ago, the middle east was going through radicalism 1.0. sunni extremists had taken the mosque in mecca. shi-ite extremists had performed

a revolution in iran, held americans hostage, and killed hundreds of u.s. marines in beirut. i came to washington after graduate school at harvard, and it took a job as a 17,000 year -- $70,000 a year researcher at a brand-new organization committed to injecting sound scholarship, independent analysis, and new ideas in u.s. middle east policy. there were five of us back then, just five. we were led by a brilliant and enterprising young -- young scholar. before long, we published our first research paper. another young scholar named dennis ross -- since then, we have got our various paths. i have stayed at the institute

which has become my home. in has changed from being just a strategic theatre between the superpowers to being the central focus of american foreign policy in its own way. and for that change, the institute has grown and matured to the point that today justifiably boasts what i believe is the greatest collection of knowledge, expertise, and insight on the politics and policy of the middle east in washington today. it is with great pride that i stand here this evening with more than 130 members of our board of trustees. they have given so generously to assure the health and vitality of this institution. with our past presidents that have less for 2.5 decades, with the more than 45 colleagues from the institute's staff that

worked tirelessly to improve the quality of u.s. middle east policy. with valued members of our board of advisers whose wisdom and council have been priceless, and with more than 200 members of the washington policy committee. people that helped make, shape, employment, and interpret policy. people who i have said of more times and i can remember, and all of you to join us in celebrating a quarter-century of the washington institute. to all of you, i say thank you. thank you. [applause] just a word about our program. in a moment, i will call upon our institute president who will introduce the keynote speaker. i am afraid that there will not be an opportunity for questions following the remarks.

instead, i have asked that everyone remain in their seats to allow our guest to depart and to allow the board of trustees and a group of very special guests to leave for buses outside where we're going to the department of state for a dinner in the honor of the washington institute hosted by a the dippy secretary of state. if you don't have a chance to pose questions tonight, everyone here will have a chance to pose them tomorrow at 2:00. that is when this group reconvenes across the street at the renaissance hotel for the closing panel discussion of this twenty fifth anniversary symposium featuring outside guests tom freedman and bill kristol, and our own in-house talent. i hope you can join us for what i'm sure will be a fascinating discussion.