today, and a possible 2012 presidential bid, coming up later on c-span. >> for all the people in the book, there are many mistakes that might have made in their lives, but moving from the south is not one of them. >> nearly 6 million african- americans migrated from the south. tonight isabel wilkerson on their journeys, at 8 on "q&a" on c-span. c-span. >> this week, on wednesday, senate republicans invited him. he is also the senate republicans point person on health care. thank you for being here. >> thank you, susan. >> samuel is the new managing editor for congress. kenneth brown is the national politics reporter for "politico

." >> congratulations on your new leadership position. >> thank you. >> let's get to the question of the midterms and the expectations that republicans seem to have that this will be a good year for republicans. can you tell us a little bit about how you are preparing for this or tamping down expectations whether the republicans can take control of the senate? >> people all around the country are very concerned because washington has not been listening. we have a government that spends too much, burroughs to much, and is growing bigger the day. and iscuh,uch,borrows's growing bigger every day. if you look at the polls around

the country, if the election were today, we would do very well east to west. >> to do think the republicans will take over the senate? >> that is hard to tell. you write about this every day. there are a number of tossup races. but the enthusiasm and energy is clearly on the side of people who have a conservative approach of things. in america, that's as live within our means and not spend more than what we have. was balance our budgets. families have to do that. washington should do that. washington should do that. >> speaking of campaign promises and health care, republicans are talking about repealing the health care law. but until you have more republicans -- and to have a republican the white house, it does not make -- until you have a republican in the white house, it does not make sense to think

there will be much done on that. what can you really do on this front? >> i think your articles in the last couple of days were such that you got it right. there were lots of promises made by the obama administration for what people should expect and those promises were not in anyway fulfilled. that is what the american people overwhelmingly want to have this bill repealed and replaced. realistically, with the president in the white house, no matter how successful the republicans are this year, you're talking about elections for 2010 and 2012. in 2012, the senate, in terms of who is up for running that year, you have many more democrats at risk. so 2012 is the year the should be a big year for republicans. if that follows through, then

barack obama will be a one-term president. then you can really have a president who will sign the kind of things that we need to have signed. i would expect the -- there are things that you can do to chip away, piece-by-piece, to strangle off this big health care takeover by the government. >> can you talk about the dynamics of the senate? you have a democratic president in the white house. the democrats have a huge majority in the senate. still, we find that they have had a lot of difficulty getting anything done. even if you do very well this year and you either take control and have a narrow majority or, as a lot of people expect, do very well and have a much closer minority, does anything get done in this senate in the kind of climate we have in washington? >> i like to see things get

done. done. 59-41 senate with the democrats in charge, we have tried to work to find common ground to best work for the people because we do need health care reform in this country. now there are so many issues. harry reid and the democrats said, if we could only pickoff one, he was not looking for consensus. if you look at the days when people overwhelmingly got together and gain consensus, that is how it was when i was in the state senate in wyoming. we found common ground. but this administration, under harry reid's leadership, his gold has been to pick off one to to his goal has been to pick off one. if i can just take one with me and get our 60 to add to his 59, that has been the press that they took. that has not been good for

america and it is not for bipartisanship coming together. bipartisanship coming together. if you have a more balanced congress, then the president could move more to the middle instead of to the far left so that we can keep the country moving. >> you had a huge democratic era in 2008. why was it not possible for them to do the things say there are promised that they would do given that they had such a huge majority? >> the positions they took were so extreme. they went so far out of the main street -- mainstream. the founding fathers wanted things to cool down so they would not to overreact.

there is a mechanism set up in the senate. the senate is set to play defense, to stop bad ideas from happening. that is a lot of what i see our role for the last two years in this administration, to try to stop bad ideas from becoming law. that is how the senate is structurally said so that people ought to be working together for solutions that are in the best interest of the country. >> if you do take the majority, would you support filibuster reform? >> no matter who is in the minority, this has been set up and away -- set up in l.a. by our founding fathers to slow things down -- in a way by our founding fathers to slow things down. >> the modern filibuster has changed. do you think it is working for

the senate and the country? >> it used to be 67 the soubriquet fell board -- to break a filibuster. a number of years ago, you had to go and talk for all of that period of time. now they can have it without the long speeches. that was a historic time. "mr. smith goes to washington" filibusters. >> some of your republican colleagues suggests that, if republicans to gain control of congress, a government shutdown may be in the offering. specifically for health care reform, there is the idea of putting restrictions on appropriations for hhs for irs. -- h as or -- hhs or irs.

is a government shutdown something that you would harkin? >> i would like to see some of this money choke off that is supposed to go to the income revenue service. the health care losses that every individual needs to buy health insurance. the irs has to check to make sure that each one of your viewers has health insurance. so they need irs agents to do that. if they do not have the money, they will not be able to a moment that. also, the mandate that businesses supply health insurance -- there are areas where you can limit money going to agencies, same with the health and human services budget. they need about $10 billion to try to go through all the rules and regulations. i can think of ways to try to stop that money from going to those specific agencies, the internal revenue service, health

and human services, but there are a number of areas that i would go after with the health care law in efforts to repeal and replace it. this is called the class act, long-term care, which is in the first 10 years of the bill. the whole goal is to bring in money. even kent conrad from north dakota called it a ponzi scheme, which would make what bernie madoff did minimal. we ought to repeal that. i think states ought to be able to opt out of it. nancy pelosi said that any given state could decide to be part of the rules or regulations. nancy pelosi said you have to pass the bill first before you get to find out what is in it. people are finding out what is in it. the whole irs regulation with the 1099's and the small businesses in the country with 40 million of them who will have to fill up these additional 1099 forms for anybody out there that

they buy or sell from. it will cost millions of dollars in expenses and nobody saw that coming until law was passed. >> a group of stranded in pledges from members of congress to defund the health care law. would you take that pledge? >> i would have to look at that. >> it has passed after a very long and difficult process. why is it not then that the system worked in that situation as well? what happened? i remember one event where you guys went to the white house, senate republicans, and came back completely upset and said you were being used as props. that meeting seemed to signal a complete change in how the process went.

why were you not able to work on an issue that was so important to the country and get it done when it seemed so clearly at the top of list -- top of the list of priorities? >> that is a good question. why is the public so upset? all of this, the president said it would be shown on c-span. the deliberations and the discussions were to be shown on c-span. everything has been done behind closed doors. the finance committee and what did harry reid to do? he went to both of those bills, into his office, closed the door, and he adjusted couple of people, including rahm emanuel, came out with a 2000-page health care bill that left things out that had been to the finance committee that worked in both bills. other things that were not in neither bill -- none of this was in public debate. none of this were in open

meetings. so you have all of this behind doors and then you cram in things like the cornhuskers kickback for the special deal for nebraska and the special day. deal for people in from mecca -- in florida. -- and the special. deal for people in florida. -- and the special gatorade deal for people in florida. people were screaming, no ex- plan do not passes. you had this incredible -- you had this incredible opportunity. he spent two years on health care, ignoring the economy, the debts, the big spending. if you like the health care you have, you can keep it.

now 51% will not be able to keep the health care they have. he said they would get the cost of health care down. kathleen sebelius said insurance premiums would drop 20% when this passes. we have seen premiums go up. item after item, he said this would save money and cut the deficit. now the new talking points for the democrats say, do not mention that, because nobody will believe it. the reality is very different from the promises. even bill clinton said "people will love this." last week, he said, "i was wrong." >> does the president have any option? was there no negotiating option with republicans, hence, the debate took place almost entirely within the democratic

segment? >> they ultimately voted against what was crammed into the bill. members of congress, the democrats did not want to have to live with this plan. i kept calling for the president to please put somebody in charge of medicare and medicaid for the country. united healthcare bill on the for the cuts $500 billion for seniors in medicare. it puts 16 million more people on medicaid. there should be somebody who is the director of that program for the country who could then come to congress and answer some questions, let what will the impact be on their medicare patients if you cut 500 billions -- $500 billion from a to? what what -- $500 billion from

it? the president, for a year, refused to appoint anybody. he finally named somebody after this was signed into law. that was a recess appointment and that person still has not come to congress to explain to the american people his quotes about rationing care, about his love of the national system, the british health care system, and a system designed to redistribute wealth. >> two of your republican colleagues, paul ryan and judd gregg, they said that reconciliation would be an effective tool to use to repeal parts of the health care law. that is a tool you can use to

get around 60 votes. that is very highly criticized by republicans during the health care debate. would you be using reconciliation to pull back elements of the health care law? >> i have not looked into that aspect of it. there are a number of different aspects that we ought to take out of the health care bill. >> the you will not commit to reconciliation? >> i have to look into it. >> there are aspects of the law that is popular with the public, portability and the lifetime cap raise and existing conditions. how does the system fund those popular aspects? without universal mandate? without universal mandate? >> in wyoming, it was more

expensive than other insurance, but it was something that we could work with people and had subsidies and it worked well in that state and 20-some states had something like it. this administration has come out with their plan, but for people who have been doing it right all along as part of the state plans, they are not eligible. they are not eligible for what has come through in this health care law. if you have been without any insurance for six months, if you have somebody who has been paying a higher rate, the new losses it has to be down at the rate of someone else. if you have somebody paying the higher rates, they get no benefits from the health care law. you have the only ones who are benefiting who have been trying to get health insurance. it is only for people who had no health insurance for six months

to will be helped by this. there are huge inequities in this. there are a number of things that kicked in this past week. the president had a backyard meeting and talked about what is supposed to be popular. "usa today" talked about what they were. underneath, there were long progress called "be aware." it is very like that -- it is very likely that if you want to raise a lot time amounts or have not limited, you all will pay more. in terms of all the things that a supposed to be the good things that are going to affect have lots of "be aware" with. that is why 60% of the american people want this health care law repealed and replaced. >> can we talk a little bit

about the turmoil? about the turmoil? your leadership position ha is reflect those in some ways of what happened in alaska where the incumbent senators have been beaten in the primary. we saw the primary results in delaware. what is happening in the republican party that allows my record? with a long roa how does that bode for the party going into 2012? >> there are a lot of very nice people across the country who are concerned with a government that spends too much, barrault's to march, and gets very big -- borrows too much, and it's very big. -- and it getgets very big.

>> are they taking some of this out on your party members in the way you did not expect? >> mike castle voted for cap and trade and a number of things. i think it is an issue of what we are spending money on. how can we spend it? are people getting value for their dollars? a lot of people around the country do not believe they are. we're completely united in the senate behind all the nominees of our party. that is our goal to get them elected come the fall. we're all working together and we are working for the nominees. joe miller is the nominee for the republican party and has the full support of the republican congress. the people of delaware have spoken in the republican primary. the nominee is there. that is who we will be supporting. >> on immigration reform, there

are potential republican nominees for president for 2012. mitt romney has tried talking with members of congress who say we need to get immigration reform off the table. republicans could face some trouble in the southwest without picking up nevada and some other -- arizona, potentially, florida. if the republican party continues running on a platform in which it is not viewed as amenable to what immigration advocates want, that could pose problems for a republican nominee in 2012. have you heard that it will be a problem for republican candidate in 2012 immigration reform is not dealt with? is the real likelihood that republicans who want to take immigration reform off the table in the next two years will be able to get it out of the

election equation for republican candidates? >> i have not heard that at all. the issue i hear all the time is the legal immigration. we are a nation of immigrants. we have come here legally. there is a problem with people who have come here illegally. there is a memorandum from homeland security about ways to allow people that are here illegally to stay here. is an 11-page report that senator grassley from fila was able to retain -- from iowa who was able to retain it. i have been to the border. the border is not secure. that is a big problem. i think that is what is driving this debate and this discussion. first, you have to secure the border. >> the senator, -- >> senator,

there is an indication of a certain rapidity of your ascent in the senate. can you talk a little bit about what you hope to do in this job given that you know how the senate works, they know how to cement defense and not office, and what will be a new class of people what new class is always do? they want to come and change the world. world. what is your role in trying to help them navigate this very unfamiliar? >> we had 100 doctors on staff and you have a different personality, different ego, you have. duke -- pediatricians and psychiatrists and surgeons and we are all different. but all the doctors wanted to do a good job for the patients. the senators want to do a good job for this country. [laughter]

i was the surgeon, too. i am looking forward to working with all of them. but there is common success that we will have as we continue to talk about a message, which is that this government spends too that this government spends too much, barrault'borrows too much, and is getting too big. this president has doubled bad debt in five years, tripling in 10 if you look at the budget. that is irresponsible. that is unsustainable. what you see across the country is that people are worried that this is irreversible. we need our country back. we have to rein in sin. we can continue spending -- rein

in this in. we cannot continue spending like this. >> what you think will happen with the tax debate? >> i think you should never raise taxes at the time of a recession. that -- that is my position of my colleagues and myself. we will bring it to the senate. the majority leader will decide what comes to the senate floor. >> and the start treaty? >> as you know, i voted against it. it had to do with missile defense. st.ent to russia, moscow, pete petersburg earlier this year. there are parts of the treaty that says we would not be able to continue to defend ourself as a nation. to me, the start treaty is about how many nuclear weapons we have and how many the russians have.

it is not about how we can defend ourselves. we need to defend ourselves against everybody, not just focus on the russians. i do not think we should limit our defense. that is my concern. that is why i voted against it. that is why i voted against it. >> i heard a lot of questions about the senate dynamic. given the scope of the problems that this country has run out, is it better tactically for them to get closer, but not take the majority in 2012 than it

would be to take out the senate out right right now? >> i would say probably yes in that, in the senate, as the senator said, it is much easier to play defense. the power to say no is the real value of the vote in the senate. to the extent that you make plans and devise strategy and you quit your caucus and you present proposals and then the other side says no and it fails, then you look like a failure. this is what the democrats are living with now. this is what republicans lived with at the end of the bush administration. in terms of just political dynamics and political strategy, it is almost better to be in the position of saying no and being on the filibuster in sight of the question. -- on the filibustering side of

the equation. the equation. >> when we ask him about republicans winning control of the sun that, people are very reluctant to go there. they think it is a long shot. it will be hard to be in the republican majority with a democratic president. it is easier to be in the minority, especially in the senate, because you have a lot of power. to be a majority in the senate, they will have to work with democrats. there will have to work with a democratic president. that blurs the lines for them when they want to create contrast in the next two years, particularly with republicans trying to defeat barack obama in 2012. it will make their job more difficult. >> legislatively, what doesn't look like leading