>> grimaced -- give us their roles. >> it is not driven as much. i have been in the u.s. for a long time, but it is not driven as much by the almighty dollar. host: all right. here is the president lives. >> good afternoon, everybody. last night i had a chance to speak to the leaders of the house and the senate and reached out to those who had both won and lost in both parties. i told john boehner and mitch mcconnell that i look forward to working with them, and i think nancy pelosi and harry reid for their extraordinary leadership over the last two years. after what i am sure was a long night for a lot of you, and the list to say, it was for me, i can tell you that, you know, some election nights are more fun than others.

some are exhilarating. some are humbling. but every election, regardless of who wins and who loses it, is a reminder that in a democracy, power rests not with those of us in elected office but with the people we have the privilege to serve. over the last few months, have had the opportunity to travel around the country and the people where they live and where they worked. from the backyards to factory forces. i did some talking, but mostly it did a lot of listening. and yesterday's vote confirmed what i have heard from folks all across america. people are frustrated. they're deeply frustrated with the pace of our economic recovery and the opportunities that they hope for their children and their grandchildren. they want jobs to come back faster. they want paychecks to go further. and they want the ability to

give their children the same chances than opportunities as they have had in life. the men and women who sent us here did not expect washington to solve all their problems, but they do inspect washington to work for them, not against them. they want us to note -- they want to know that their tax dollars are being spent and not wasted and that we are not going to leave our children a legacy of debt. i want to know that their voices are not being drowned out by a sea of lobbyists and special interests and partisan bickering. they want business to be done here openly and honestly. i ran for this office to tackle these challenges and give voice to the concerns of everyday people. over the last two years, we have made progress. but clearly, too many americans have not felt that progress yet, and they told us that yesterday. as president, i take responsibility for that.

what yesterday also told us is that no one party will be able to dictate where we go from here. we must find common ground in order to make progress on some uncommonly difficult challenges. i told john boehner and mitch mcconnell last night i am very eager to sit down with members of both parties and figure out how we can move forward together. i am not suggesting this will be easy. i will not pretend that we will be able to bridge every difference or solve every disagreement. there is a reason we have two parties in this country and both democrats and republicans who have certain beliefs and certain principles that each fields cannot be compromised. but what i think the american people are expecting in what we owed them is to focus on those issues that affect their jobs, their security, and their future, reducing our deficit, promoting a clean energy economy, making sure that our

children are the best educated in the world, making sure that we're making investments in technology that will allow us to keep our competitive edge in the global economy. because the most important concept we face is not the contest between democrats and republicans. in this century, the most important competition we face is between america and our economic competitors around the world. to win a competition to continue our economic leadership, we're going to need to be strong and we will need to be united. none of the challenges we face a land themselves to simple solutions or bumper sticker slogans. nor are the answer is found in any one particular philosophy or ideology. as i have said before, no person, no party has a monopoly on wisdom. that is why i am eager to hear good ideas wherever they come from, whoever proposes them. that is why i believe it is

important to have an honest and civil debate about the choices that we face. that is why i want to engage both democrats and republicans in serious conversations about where we are going as a nation. with so much at stake, with the american people do not want from us, especially here in washington, is to spend the next two years refining the political battles of the last two. we just had a tough election. we will have another in 2012. i am not so naive as to think everybody will put politics aside until then. but i do hope to make progress on the serious problems facing us right now. and that will require all of us, including me come to work harder and billy -- at building consensus. a little over a month ago, we held a town hall meeting in richmond, virginia, and one of the most telling questions came from a small-business owner who runs a pre care firm.

he tell me how hard he works and how busy he was to know how he does not have time to pay attention to of the back and forth in washington. and he asked, is there hope for us return to civility in our discourse to help the legislative process? so as i step on the boots again tomorrow, i know that you guys have got it under control. it is hard enough faith in that right now, he said. i do believe there is hope for civility. i do believe there is hope for progress. that is because i believe in the resiliency of a nation that has bounced back for much worse than what we're going through right now. a nation that has overcome more, a depression, that has been made more perfect in our struggle for individual rights and individual freedoms. each time progress has come slowly and even painfully.

but progress has always come. because we have worked at it and because we believed in it. and most of all, because we remember that our first allegiance as citizens is not to a party or region or faction but to the country. because while we may be proud democrats or prod republicans, we are prouder to be americans. that is something we all need to remember right now and in the coming months. if we do, i have no doubt that we will continue this nation's long journey towards a better future. so with that, let me take some questions. i will start off with ap. >> thank you, mr. president. are you willing to concede at all that what happened last night was not just an expression of frustration about the economy but a fundamental rejection of your agenda? given the results, who do you think speaks to the true voice of the american people right now, you or john boehner?

>> i think that there is no doubt that people's number one concern is the economy. and what they were expressing great frustration about is the fact that we have not made enough progress on the economy. we have stabilized the economy. we have got job growth in the private sectors. but people all across america are not feeling that progress. they do not see it. and they understand that as a the president of the united states and that my car responsibility is making sure we have an economy that is growing, and middle class that is secure, the jobs are being created. so i think and have got to take direct responsibility for the fact that we have not made as much progress as we need to make. moving forward, i think the question is going to be, cannot

democrats and republicans sit down together and come up with a set of ideas that address those poor concerns -- those core concerns? i am confident that we can. i think are some areas where it will be difficult for us to agree on. but the debt will be a bunch of areas where we can agree on. i do not think there's anybody in america meetings we got an energy policy that works the way it needs to, the things that we should not be working on energy independence, and that gives opportunities for democrats and republicans to come together and think about, whether it is natural gas are energy efficiency or how we can build electric cars in this country, how we move forward on that agenda. i think everybody in this country things we have got to make sure our kids are equipped in terms of their education, their science background, the mathematics background to compete in this new global economy. that is going to be an area where i think there's potential common ground.

so on a whole range of issues, there will be areas where we disagree. i think the overwhelming message that i hear from the voters is that we want everybody to act responsibly in washington. we want you to work harder to arrive at consensus. we want you to focus completely on jobs and the economy and growing it so that we are ensuring a better future for our children and our grandchildren. i think that there's no doubt that as i reflect on the results of the election, it underscores for me that i have got to do a better job, just like everybody else in washington does. i think john boehner and i and mitch mcconnell and harry reid and nancy pelosi are going to have to sit down and work together, because i suspect that if you talk to any

individual voter yesterday, they would say that there are some things i agree with democrats on and some things i agree with republicans on. i do not think people carry around with them a fixed ideology. i think the majority people are going about their business, going about their lives. they just got to make sure we're making progress, and that'll be my top priority over the next couple of years. >> just following up on that, you do not seem to be reflecting a second-guessing any policy decisions you have made. instead send a message the voters were spending was about frustrations with the economy or maybe even chalking it up to a failure on your predicament effectively. if you are not reflecting on your policy agenda, is it possible voters can conclude you're still not getting it? >> well, that was just the first question, so we are going to have a few more here. i am doing a whole lot of

reflecting, and i think there'll be areas in policy where we are going to have to do a better job. you know, i think that over the last two years, we have made a series of very tough decisions, but decisions that were right in terms of moving the country forward in an emergency situation where we had the risk of slipping into a second great depression. but what is absolutely true is that with all the stuff coming of folks fast and furious, a recovery package, what we had to do with respect to the banks, what we had to do with respect to the automobile companies, i think people started looking at all this and felt as if the government was getting much more intrusive into people's lives than they were accustomed to. the reason was it was an

emergency situation, but i think it is understandable that people said to themselves that maybe this is the agenda as opposed response to an emergency. that is something to think that everybody in the white house understood the danger. we thought it was necessary. but i am is sympathetic to folks who looked at it and said this is looking like potential overreach. in addition, there are a bunch of price tax with that. so even though these were emergency situations, and people said that we already have these big deficits, this is potentially going to compound it. and at what point are we going to get back to a situation where we're doing with families all around the country do, which is make sure that if you spend something, you know how to pay for it? as opposed to racking of the credit card for the next generation.

and i think that the other thing that happened is that when i won the election in 2008, one of the reasons i think people were excited about the campaign was the process -- the prospect that which into business is done in washington. and we were in such a hurry to get things done that we did not change how things got done, and i think of frustrated people. you know, i am a strong believer that the year marking process in congress is not what the american people really want to see when it comes to making tough decisions about how taxpayer dollars are spent. and i had designed a bunch of bills that had air marks in them, which was contrary to what i talked about. and i think folks look at that and said this feels like the

same squabbling and since it the same ways of doing business as before. and so one of the things that i have to take responsibility for is not having moved enough on those fronts. and i think there is an opportunity to move forward on some of those issues. might understanding is that eric cantor to say -- today said he wanted to see a moratorium on earmarks continuing. that is something i think we can work on together. >> [inaudible] >> well, i think that what i think is absolutely true is voters are not satisfied with the outcomes. if right now we had 5% unemployment instead of 9.6% unemployment, and people would have more confidence in this

policy choices. the fact is is that, you know, for most folks, proof of whether the work or not is -- has the economy gone back to work needs to be? gannett has not. so my job is to make sure that is a licking and all ideas that are on the table when it comes to job creation. eight republicans have good ideas for job growth that can drive down the unemployment rate and we have not thought of them, we have not looked at them, but we think they have a chance of working, we want to try some. so on the policy front, i think the most important thing is to to roll we're not going out ideas because they are democrat or republican. we're just going to see what works. hopefully we will see it is the bottom line, results.

mike emanuel. >> thank you. health care, as you are well aware, obviously a lot of republicans ran against your health-care law. some have called for repealing the law. those are wondering, sir, if you believe that health care reform that you worked so hard on is in danger at this time and whether there is the threat as a result of this election? >> well, i know that there are some republican candidacy one last night and feel very strongly about it. -- i know there are some republican candidates that won last night that feel very strongly about it. this will come up. but i think we would be misreading the election it without the the american people want to see us for the next two years relitigate arguments that we had over the last two years. with respect to the health care and law generally, and this may go to some of the questions that

savannah was raising. you know, when i talk to a woman from new hampshire who does not have to mortgage her house because she got cancer and is seeking treatment but now is able to get health insurance, when i talk to parents who are believed that their child with a pre-existing condition can now stay on their policy until there 26 years old and give them time to transition to find a job that will give them health insurance, or the small businesses that are not taking advantage of the tax credits provided. i say to myself, this was the right thing to do. if the republicans have ideas for how to improve our health care system, if they want to suggest modifications that would deliver faster and more effective reform to a health

care system that has been wildly expensive for too many families, for businesses, and for the federal government, have to consider some of those ideas. i know one of the things that has come up is that the 1099 provision in the health-care bill appears to be too burdensome for small businesses. it just involves too much paperwork, too much filing. aid is counterproductive. it was designed to make sure that revenue was raised to help pay for some of the other provisions. but it ends up being so much trouble that small businesses find it difficult to manage. that is something we should look at. there will be examples where i think we can tweak and make improvements on the progress we have made. that is true for any significant piece of legislation. but i do nothing that if you ask

the american people, should we stop trying to close the doughnut hole several senior citizens get prescription drugs, should we go back to a situation where people with pre-existing conditions cannot get health insurance? shall we allow insurance companies to drop their coverage when you get sick in the you have been paying premiums? i do not think you have a strong vote for people saying those are provisions i want to eliminate. >> about one out of two of voters apparently said that they would like you to see it overturned or repealed. are you concerned that they may embolden those from the other party? >> it means one out of two voters think it is the right thing to do. obviously, this is an issue that has been contentious. but as i said, i think what will be useful is for us to go through the issues that

republicans have issues on. not sort of talking generally. but let's talk specifics. this particular provision when it comes to pre-existing conditions, is this something you are for or against? helping seniors get their prescription drugs. does that make sense or not? and if we take that approach, which is different from campaigning, then i think that we can continue to make some progress and find some common ground. >> thank you. republicans say more than anything else with this election was about was spending. they say it will be when hell freezes over that they will accept anything remotely like a stimulus bill or any of the proposals to have out there to stimulate job growth through spending. do you accept the fact that any kind of spending to create jobs is dead? and where can the government do

to create jobs? >> i think it will be an important question for democrats and republicans. i think the american people are absolutely concerned about spending and debt and deficits. i am going to have a deficit commission is putting forward its ideas. it is a bipartisan group that includes republican and democratic members of congress. hopefully they are able to arrive at consensus on areas where we can eliminate programs that do not work, cutback on government spending that is inefficient. streamlined government. isn't cutting into the core investments, they will make sure that we are a competitive economy that is growing in providing not -- opportunity for years to come. the question or thing that my republican friends and me and

democratic leaders are going to have to answer is, what are our priorities? what do we care about? and that is going to be a tough debate because there are some tough choices here. we already had a big deficit that i inherited. and that has been made worse because of the recession. as we bring it down, i want to make sure that we're not cutting into education. that is going to help the fine weather not we can compete around the world. i do not think we should be cutting back on research and development, because if we can develop new technologies in areas like clean energy come back and make all the difference in terms of job creation here at home. i think the proposal that i put forward with respect to infrastructure is one that is directly we have had bipartisan agreement about. and we should be able to agree now that makes no sense for china to have better rail

systems than us and singapore having better airports than us. we just learned that china now has the fastest supercomputer on earth. that used to be us. they're making investments because they know those investments will pay off for the long term. so in these budget discussions, the key is to be able to distinguish between stuff that is not adding to our growth, is not an investment in our future, and those things that are absolutely necessary for us to be able to increase job growth in the future as well. the single most important thing i think we need to do economically, and this is something that has to be done during the lame duck session, is making sure that taxes do not go up on middle-class families next year. so we have got some work to do on that front. to make sure that the families

not only are seeing a higher tax burden, which will happen if congress does not act, but also making sure the business provisions that historically we have extended each year, that for example provide tax breaks for committees that are investing here in the united states in research and development, that those are extended. i think it makes sense for us to extend unemployment insurance, because there's still a lot of folks of they're hurting. there things we can do right now that will help sustain the recovery and advanced it. even if we are also sitting down and figuring out what decisions we can make that are intelligent and smart and will not be undermining our recovery but will be encouraging job growth. >> things you called investments, they call wasteful spending. without their support, you cannot get any of it through.

>> what is absolutely true is that without any republican support on anything, it will be hard to get things done. but i will not anticipate that they are not born to support anything part of the message sent to republicans was we want to see stronger job growth in this country. and if they're good ideas about the people the work that traditionally have garnered republican support and that cannot add to the deficit, then my hope and expectation is that that is something that we're willing to have a serious conversation about. when it comes to the proposal we put forward to accelerate the appreciation for business, so that if they're building a plant or investing in new equipment next year, that they can take a complete write-off next year, get a huge tax break next year, and that would then encourage a lot of businesses to get off the sidelines. that is not historically

considered a liberal idea. that is actually an idea that business groups and republicans have supported for a very long time. again, the question is going to be, do we all come to the table with an open mind its it to ourselves, what do we think is going to make a difference for the american people? that is how we're going to be judged over the next couple years. >> thank you, mr. president. after the election two years ago when he met with republicans, you said in discussing what policies might go forward that elections have consequences. and he pointed out that you had i wonder what the concept -- that you had won. i wonder about the consequences you have. are there areas you'd be willing to compromise on the mine not have been willing to compromise on in the past? >> well, i think i have been willing to compromise in the past, and i will be willing to

compromise going forward, on the range of issues. let me give you an example. the issue of energy that i just mentioned. i think there are a lot of republicans that ran against the energy bill that passed in the house last year. so it is doubtful that you could get the votes to pass that through the house this year. or next year. or the year after. but that does not mean there is an agreement that we should have a better energy policy. so let's find those areas where we can agree. we have got broad agreement that we have got terrific natural gas resources in this country. are we doing everything we can to develop those? there's a lot of agreement around the need to make sure that electric cars are developed here in united states, that we do not fall behind other countries, or things we can do

to encourage that. there has already been bipartisan interest on those issues. there has been discussion about how we can restart our nuclear industry as a means of reducing our dependence on foreign oil and reducing greenhouse gases. is that an area where we can move forward? we were able, over the last two years, to increase, for the first time in 30 years, fuel efficiency standards on cars and trucks. we did not even the legislation. which is needed the cooperation of automakers, autoworkers, investors, and other shareholders. and that is going to move us forward in a serious way. so i think when it comes to something like energy, what we're probably going to have to do is say here are some areas where there is too much disagreement between democrats and republicans. we cannot get this done right now. but let's not wait. it's going to make progress on

the things that we do agree on. and we can continue to have a strong and healthy debate about those areas where we do not. >> [inaudible] >> e no, i am sure there will be areas, particularly around reforming how washington works, that i will be interested in. i think the american people want to see more transparency, more openness. in the midst of economic crisis, a lot of things and take responsibility for is not having push harder on some of those issues. and i think if you take republicans and democrats at their word, this is an area they want to deliver on for the american people. i want to be supportive of that effort. >> thank you, mr. president. have a policy question and a personal one. the policy question is, you talked about how the immediate goal is the bush tax cuts and making sure that do not expire for those who earn under

200,000. republicans disagree strongly. the one all the bush tax cuts extended. are you willing to compromise our negotiate on that and allow them to expire for ever run over $1 million, for instance? where are you willing to budge? the second one is, president bush, when he went through similar things, came out and humbling, and you alluded to it being humbling. and i wonder when you call your friends, like governor ted strickland, and you see 19 state legislatures go to the other side, governorships in swing states, the democratic party said back, what does it feel like? >> it feels bad. [laughter] you know, the toughest thing over the last couple of days is

seeing really terrific public servants not have the opportunity to serve anymore. at least in the short term. and you mentioned some terrific members of congress who took really tough moves because the data was the right thing. even though they knew this could cause political problems. and even though a lot of them came from really tough swing districts or majority republican districts. and the amount of courage that showed and conviction that the cut -- that they showed is something that i admire so much. i cannot overstate it. so there's not only sadness about seen them go. but there is also a lot of questioning on my part in terms of could i have done something differently or done something more so they would still be here? it is heartening.

and i take responsibility for it in a lot of ways. i will tell you they have been incredibly gracious when i have conversations with them. what they're told me is, you know, we do not have regrets, because i feel like we were doing the right thing. they may be just saying that to make me feel better, which again is a sign of their character and their class, and open a lot of them continue to pursue public service. because i think they're terrific public servants. with respect to the tax cut issue, my goal is to make sure that we do not have a huge spike in taxes for middle-class families. not only would that be a terrible burden on families who are already going through tough times, it would be bad for our economy.

it is very important that we're not taking a whole bunch of money out of the system from people who are most likely to spend that money on goods, services, shopping at the supermarket, or buying a new winter coat for the kids. that is also i think unemployment is very important it is the right thing to do for those still what would -- looking for work and struggling, but it is the right thing to do for the economy as a whole. so my goal is to sit down with speaker-elect boehner and mitch mcconnell and harry reid and nancy pelosi sometime in the next few weeks and see where we can move forward in a way that, first of all, does no harm, that extends those tax cuts that are

very important for middle-class families and also extends those provisions that are important to encourage businesses to invest in provide businesses some certainty of the next year or two. and how that negotiation works itself out, i think it is too early to say. but this is going to be one of my top priorities. my hope is that given we all have an interest in growing the economy and encouraging job growth, that we're not going to play brinksmanship but instead act responsibly. >> thank you, mr. president police said earlier that it was clear that congress was rejecting the idea of a cap and trade program and you would not be about the move forward with that . do you feel the same way with epa regulating carbon emissions? would you open it to them to do

this and think through administrative action are set off the table? and to follow-up with the set about changing the way washington words. you said you did not do enough to change when things were handled. in order to get your health care bill passed, you needed to make some of those deals. do you wish, in retrospect, that you had not made some of those deals, even amid the collapse of the program? >> i think that making sure the families have a security and that we're on a trajectory to lower health care costs was absolutely critical for this country. but you're absolutely right that when you are navigating through a house and a senate in this kind of pretty partisan environment, that it is an ugly mess when it comes to process. i think that is something that really affected how people viewed the outcome. that is something that i regret,

that we cannot have made the process more healthier than it ended up being. but i think the outcome was a good one. with respect to the epa, i think the smartest thing for us to do is to see if we can get democrats and republicans in a room who were serious about energy independence and are serious about keeping our air clean and our water clean and dealing with the issue greenhouse gases. and seeing if there are ways that we can make progress in the short term and invest in technology is in the long term that start giving us the tools to reduce greenhouse gases and solve this problem. the epa is under court order that says greenhouse gases are pollutants that fall under their

jurisdiction. and i think one of the things that is very important to me is not to have us ignore the science but rather to find ways that we can solve these problems that do not hurt the economy, that encourage the development of clean energy in this country, that may give us opportunities to create entire new industries and create jobs but could assign a competitive posture around the world. i think it is too early to say whether or not we can make some progress on that front. i think we can. cap and trade was just one way of scanning the cat, not the only way. it was a means, not an end. i will be looking for other means to address this problem. and i think epa wants help from the legislature on this. i do not think the desire is to somehow be protective of their

powers here. i think what they want to do is make sure the issues being dealt with. >> i wanted to do a personal and policy one as well. on personal, you had a lot of fun on the campaign trail by some republicans were drinking a slurpee residence on the sidelines, but the point was that use it if you want to go for, you put the car in d. if you want to go backwards, you put it in r. now that the message has been at rejected, is it possible that there are a majority of americans think your policies are taking us in reverse? and what changes we make to your approach to try to fix that and to better connect with the american people. and on a policy from, don't ask don't tell us something you promised to end. and we had 60 votes and 59 votes in the senate. it is a tough issue. you have not been able to do it. did you have to tell your

liberal base of a b-52, 53 votes in the senate, you're just not able to get it done in the next two years? >> let's take the second issue first. i have been a strong believer in the notion that if somebody is willing to serve in our military in uniform, putting their lives on the line for our security, the addition not be prevented from doing so because of their sexual orientation. since there has been a lot of discussion about polls over the next -- are the last 48 hours, it is worth noting that the overwhelming majority of americans feel the same way. it is the right thing to do. as commander-in-chief, i have said that making this change needs to be done in an orderly fashion. i have worked with the pentagon, worked with secretary gates, worked with an romell and -- worked with the admiral to make sure we're working with base --

on this in a systematic way. we need to change this policy. there will be a review of the beginning of the month will have a survey of attitudes and opinions within the armed forces. i will expect that secretary of defense and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, something to say about that review. i will look at it very carefully. but that will give us time to act during the lame duck session to change this policy. keep in mind we have a bunch of court cases out there as well. and something that would be very disruptive to good order and good discipline and unit cohesion is if we got this issue bouncing around on the courts as it already has ever the last several weeks or the pentagon and the chain of command does not know at any given time what rules they're working on. we need to provide certainty.

it is time for us to move this policy for, and this should not be a policy issue. this is an issue we have a sizable portion of the american people squarely behind the notion that folks who are willing to serve on our behalf should be treated fairly and equally. in terms of how we move forward, i think that the american people understand that we're still digging our way out of a pretty big mess. so i do not think anybody denies that we are in a ditch. i just did not think they feel like we have gotten all the way out of the ditch yet. and to move the analogy for that used in the campaign, i think with a one rainout is democrats and republicans both pushing some more to get the car on lower ground. and we have not done that.

if you think i was engaging in to image campaign rhetoric saying the republicans were just sitting on the side of the road watching us get that far out of the ditch, at the very least, we're pushing in opposite directions. >> you just reject the idea altogether that your policies could be going in reverse. >> yes. look, here's the bottom line. when i came into office, this economy was in a freefall. and the economy has stabilized. the economy is growing. we have seen at nine months of private sector job growth. i did it would be hard to argue that we're going backwards. what you can argue is we are stuck in neutral. we're not moving the way we need to to make sure that folks have the jobs, have the opportunity, are seeing economic growth in

their community the way they need to. and that is going to require democrats and republicans to come together and look for the best ideas to move things forward. it will not be easy. not just because the democrats and republicans may have different priorities, as we were just discussing when it came to how we structure tax cuts. but because these issues are hard. you know, the republicans throughout the campaign said they are very concerned about that and deficits. well, one of the most important things we could do for a debt and deficits is economic growth. what other proposals to they have to grow the economy? if, in fact, they're rejecting some of the proposals i have made, i want to hear from them. what affirmative policies can make a difference in terms of encouraging job growth and

promoting the economy? because i do not think that tax cuts alone are going to be a recipe for the kind of expansion that we need. from 2001 to 2009, we said taxes pretty significantly, but we did not see the kind of expansion that will be necessary in terms of driving the unemployment rate down significantly. i think what we're going to need to do and what the american people want is for us to mix and match ideas and figure out those areas where we can agree on, move forward on those, disagree without being disagreeable on those areas that we cannot agree on. if we accomplish that, there'll be time for politics letter. but over the next year, i think we can solidify this recovery and give people a little more confidence. next question. >> thank you, mr. president.

i want to ask if you're going to have john boehner over for a a slurpee? but i have a serious question. >> i might so. they're delicious and drinks. [laughter] >> you seem to be in a reflective mood. do you think you need to hit the reset button with business? how the plan to set that reset button with business? would you include anything beyond your cleveland speech, those proposals, to get them off the sidelines, get them off the cash they reporting, and start hiring again? >> this is an important question that we have been asking ourselves for several months now. you are right. as i reflect on what has happened over the last two years, one of the things i think has not been managed by me as well as it needed to be was finding the right balance in making sure that businesses have

rules of the road and are treating customers fairly. whether it is their credit cards or insurance or their mortgages. but also making absolutely clear that the only way america succeeds is if businesses are succeeding. the reason we have got an unparalleled standard of living in the history of the world is because we have a free market that is dynamic and entrepreneurialism, and that free-market has to be nurtured and cultivated. and there is no doubt that when you had the financial crisis on wall street, the bonus controversies, the battle around health care, battle around financial reform, and then you have bp -- you had a success a

set of issues in which i think business took the message that, well, it seems that we may be always painted as the bad guy. so i have got to take responsibility in terms of making sure that i make clear to the business community as well as to the country that the most important thing we can do is to boost and encourage our business sector and make sure that they are hiring. we do have specific plans in terms of how we can structure that out reach. over the last two years, we have been talking to ceo's constantly. and as i plan for my trip later this week to asia, the whole focuses on how we are going to open up markets so that american businesses can prosper and we can sell more goods and create more jobs here in the united states.

and a bunch of corporate executives are going to be joining us so that i can help them open up those markets and allow them to sell their products. so there has been a lot of strong interaction behind those things. but nothing sending the right time publicly will be important. it could make a difference at the margins in terms of how businesses make investment decisions. >> [inaudible] >> well, i already discussed a couple that have not been acted on yet. you're right, i made these proposals two months ago or three months ago, but it was in the midst of a campaign season or it was doubtful that they were going to get a full hearing just because there was so much political noise going on. as we move forward, sitting down and talking with businesses to figure out what exactly would help you make more investments that could create more jobs here in the united states and

listening hard to them in a context for many democrats and republicans are together. so we are receiving the same message at the same time and then acting on that agenda can make a big difference. >> thank you, mr. president. how do you respond to those who say the election outcome, at least in part, was the voters saying that they see you as out of touch with their personal economic pain, and you really making changes in your leadership style? >> you know, there is an inherent in danger in being in the white house and being in the bubble. i mean, folks did not have any complaints about my leadership style when i was running around iowa for a year, and they got a

pretty good look at me a close and personal. and they were able to lift the hood and kick the tires. i think they and understood that my story was theirs. i might have a funny name. i might have lived in some different places. but the values of hard work and responsibility and honesty and looking out for one another that had been instilled in them by their parents, those are the same values that i took from my mother and my grandparents. and so the track record has been that when i am out of this place, that is not an issue. when you're in this place, it is hard not to seem removed. and one of the challenges that we have got to think about is

how i meet my responsibilities here in the white house, which require a lot of hours and a lot of work, but still have that opportunity to engage with the american people on a day-to-day basis. and give them confidence that i am listening to them. those letters that i read every night, some of them just break my heart. some of them provide me encouragement and inspiration. but nobody is filming me reading those letters. and so it is hard, i think, for people to get a sense of, well, how was he taking in this information? so i think there were more things that we can do to make sure that i am getting out of here. but i think it is important to

point out as well that, you know, a couple of great communicators, ronald reagan and bill clinton, were standing at this podium two years into their presidency getting very similar questions because the economy was not working the way it needed to be and there were a whole range of factors that made people concerned that maybe the party in power was not listening to them. this is something that i think every president needs to go through, because the responsibilities of this office are so enormous and so many people are depending on what we do. and in the rush of activity, sometimes we lose track of the

ways that we connected with folks that got us here in the first place. and that is something -- as are not recommending for every future president that they take a shellacking like i did last night. [laughter] i am sure there are easier ways to learn these lessons, but i do think that, you know, this is a growth process. and an evolution. and the relationship that i have had with the american people is one that builds slowly, peaked at this incredible high, and then during the course of the last two years, as we have together gone through some very difficult times, as wit has gotten tougher, and there will be more ups and downs during the course of me being in this office, but the one thing that i

want to end on and is getting out here -- getting out of here is good for me, too. because i travel around the country. even in the toughest of these debates. health care last year. during the summer when there were protesters about. when used a meeting families who have lost loved ones in afghanistan or iraqi. i always come away from those interactions just feeling so much more optimistic about this country. we have such good and decent people who, on a day-to-day basis, are finding all kinds of ways to live together, to educate -- to educate kids, and grow their and committees, create businesses, and work together to create great new products and services.

the american people always make me optimistic. that is why during the course of the last two years, as tough as it has been, as many sometimes scary moments as we have gone through, i have never doubted that we're going to emerge stronger than we were before. and i think that remains true, and i am going to be looking forward to playing my part in helping that journey along. thank you very much, everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> at the east room of the white house, the president in a one- hour news conference, taking questions on the returns from last night, what it means the next two years of the obama

administration and the start of the 112th congress. questions on the prevacid and the upcoming debt commission making recommendations in december. don't ask don't tell. the lessons to learn personally in his conversations with the presumptive speaker-elect, john boehner. our continuing coverage of the day after the election. you can join the conversation on line on our website, c- span.org/livesocial. we're keeping track of many of the twitter pages of people like carly fiorina who said making government leaner and making it work does not end today in i am grateful for your support. that was before considering her race to barbara boxer, who sent this week -- thank you, california. it is all on our website, c- span.org. we will continue to watch from the east room of the white house and take phone calls as we await a conference call from the democratic leaders of the senate. first up is from the independent

line, charleston, south carolina. caller: thank you. i think it is important to notice what happened here right before the elections, even though it is an oft-year election. a lot of people came out this year. it seems like it is directly proportional with the rate of unemployment. luckily, i am college graduate. yes only 24. so i have only been in the real work force for about three years. but it just seems like it as kind of become a priority now, and that is why think the democrats welcome a lot of heat. host: we're monitoring this conference call that we will bring to your life. and we also have on our website, the senate balance of power. three senate seats still up in the air -- colorado, washington

state, and the right-in an effort by lisa murkowski in alaska. washington state, republican line. caller: i was pretty impressed by the speech but notice -- the bill clinton's speech but notice the big difference between that and obama. i still believe obama does not quite understand what the american public is saying and not sure the lessons learned are the ones that will bring people together, be open and have transparent government and will make us feel better and get compromise. it brings up -- up a republican against democrat continually in the speech. i wish i was more optimistic but i am not in terms of the president. host: some of the headlines. "the houston chronicle" this morning, nation swings to the right. from "pittsburgh post-coup that" gop captured u.s. house. from the "the atlanta journal-

constitution" -- from richmond -- from the register -- in colorado, the race has been called, senator michael bennet, appointed to fill the vacancy by can salazar declared the winner. still be determined in washington state where at the moment patty murray is ahead in the polls but no final decision on that and of course, write-in still in place and alaska. north carolina. democrats' line but caller: yes. thank you for taking my call. i really believe that president obama just does not get it. i am a democrat but i voted yesterday straight republican in everything. the comments president obama is

making -- i was kind of appalled. calling on yesterday all latinos to go out and vote. there are more people voting in elections then just black and latinos. and he just doesn't get it. host: the president leaving on friday for a 10-day trip, including a three-day stop in india that will also include japan and south korea. next year the president will be hosting the president of china will be coming to washington. headline from "the new york times" and "the washington post ," both with the same message. taking you still to the live view of the east room of the white house and taking you to democratic leaders in a few minutes. good afternoon. caller: i have a challenge for c-span, and i appreciate you educating the public but there is one thing i want to ask the american people to do.

if the c-span can help facilitate this, this would be great. one thing i would like to do is educate the american people by thinking about which house deals, and how it affects month. i don't care about it be republican or democrat, but there are issues that do come up and affect them. i will give you two examples. and there was one that was in the house right now. house bill 4646, by peter defazio and tom harkin, 1% sales tax on every deposit that is made in any transaction with your bank, any dividends or anything that comes through. i would like to see americans educate themselves and have c- span asked them out these questions, to ask them what did they know about it and understand about it. host: we have and we certainly welcome the future, not only for the lame-duck but also in preparation for the start of the next congress.

cynthia, thank you for calling from texas. franklin from nashville, tennessee, on our line for republicans. caller: i would like to know if you have a panel later, what would be an interesting fact would be how many of the incumbents' that were defeated last night voted for the tarp proposal two years ago. you know, if someone knows the answer to that, i would like to know. host: we would need to take a look at those who did not support the health care bill on the democratic side and still lost in their own reelection bill. we will continue to track that information and resent that. our site c-span.org includes all of the events last night, the victory and concession speeches. in case you missed one or want to see it again, from marco rubio in florida to barbara boxer in california, all available at c-span.org.

rodney from decatur, alabama. welcome to the program. can you turn the volume down on your set cut -- your set? we are getting feedback. are you with us? caller: i am with you. yes, i would like to know where the american people are. i see the republicans, they had control of the house and senate for 12 years or longer and a president that was republican for eight years and all of this debt comes from them. during the campaign was also talk about the $2 trillion worth of debt but anybody knows with high school education or college, basic economics, during a recession you have to spend money. they had to spend the $2 trillion worth of debt where we will continue to have 600,000 jobs lost per month.

i just don't understand what the people don't see. with $11 trillion worth of debt, we have to get back out of the ditch and we are still in the ditch and i don't see the republicans. the the other thing is with the taxes. all of the taxes are still there but we still lost 500 to 600,000 jobs and lost with the republican tax is there. so, nobody was hiring during that time and the taxes are still there now. but without obama spending the $2 trillion worth of debt, that money, we would still be in trouble and the taxes are still better. so, i think it is time for a buy -- host: i have to stop it there. now we will listen to a conference call from several democratic leaders in various locations including senator harry reid reelected in nevada. >> if you want to ask a question, you need to dial 0 to be routed to an operator and the question goes through.

for many reasons, we cannot have it as a free for all. after they are dumb, press 0, you can go to an operator to ask your question. that being said, senator reid? >> thank you very much. we have already done a lot of press, so i hope this is helpful to you. first, i really look forward to working with the new members, both of the republicans and democrats and find shared solutions to our shared problems. i had conversations today with the president, with senator mcconnell. i am looking to talk to john boehner, but i have not had a chance to do so. it was tough on all sides. that compared to what the police are facing for their homes, a decent education, and their jobs. there are many points of view on what the midterm election means. this is what senate democrats

take away. number one, the american people expect us to work together. we are committed to putting the concerns of middle-class families first and work to find common ground for real solutions and real progress. and we are not finished fighting big banks, which have big bucks, and they are not using those to stimulate the economy. we want to make sure we protect social security. we want to make sure that we do things that stop bp and other companies like that from spoiling our earth. we want most of all -- but not an order of priority -- just talking about nevada, the number one issue during my campaign was corporations that ship jobs overseas. so, we are going to look at that very closely because there is nothing that has impacted the middle-class more than jobs shipping overseas. we will keep fighting to stop this, to power back in the hands, i repeat for the third time, the middle-class.

republicans must take the responsibility to solve the problems of ordinary americans. simply saying no as we had this past congress, we had to procedurally figure ways through a round things, will not bring jobs bank -- back and help families try to the ends meet. no is not the answer. it has to be yes, not all yes but a combined yes, something we worked out, consensus yes. the time for politics is over. the elections are completed. so this time to get back to work and get the country out of the economic ditch. senator durbin, senator schuman and menendez. >> this is dick durbin from chicago. i cannot agree more with senator reid. i think the lesson last night from the american people is 22 work together. playing for a political score is not acceptable to the american people. if this nation is going to win, create jobs, strengthen the

middle-class and strength and businesses so they can help us expand employment in the future, we need to work together. the senate will be crucible for some of the most important issues of our day. throughout history, after a meaningful debate, the senate has risen to the challenge of governing. we must continue this important american tradition. all of you know the senate by its nature, some of the most controversial issues require 60 votes. you know by -- we know by calculation we will need help from the other side and they will need our help to try to reach these goals all of us share. it at the end of the day we played to a draw and achieve little or nothing, the american people will see through it. they want us to roll up our sleeves and find common ground, even if it means getting in, as we must, and they must give in, this is what the american process is about, it is what the senate has been about and what the challenge will be for the next two years.

>> thank you. it is chuck schumer. i want to say two words about my colleagues on the phone who are just a great team. senator reid did an amazing job in nevada and has a the admiration, thanks, and respect of our entire caucus in that regard. and senator menendez under the most difficult circumstances did a tremendous job. i think i speaking for every one of our caucus members. i just want to reiterate what dick and harry just said, the middle-class is hurting. that is the lesson of this election. the average middle income -- to me, the most salient fact or statistic of the last decade is that even from 2001 until 2007 -- and of course, continuing into the recession, median income declined for the first time in america for a decade. that means average middle-class people, i don't have a good

paying jobs, or even when they do, stretching -- stretching that middle-class paycheck is very, very hard. so, our job is to focus on the middle-class like a laser to create a good paying jobs, to help them stretched that paycheck. and there's lots of places where we can find common ground with our republican colleagues to do just that. they will believe a little more on the tax-cutting side, we will believe a little more on, you know, helping with public works and education and things like that. but we can come to common ground, and we want to come to common ground because the future of this country is at stake. if the pie stops growing for a long period of time, we don't have the america we know. and nobody wants that. the american people are optimistic. they want to believe their lives will be better 10 years from now than they are today and that their children's lives will be better than theirs. i think is in it -- this is the

first time since world war ii that people have some doubts. it is our solemn obligation for the good of the average citizen and for the country to provide a bright future for them, and though we believe we can do that in a whole variety of ways. we believe we don't have the monopoly on knowledge. there may be ways our republican colleagues think that can happen as well. and we welcome working together with them on that. >> bob menendez? >> thank you, mr. leader. first of all, let me congratulate the leader on his successful election. in the midst of the enormous challenges, money from all over the country coming in against him in that race. and to senator schumer and his election, great victory in new york. i have always thought i had two jobs at dccc -- one was to keep the democratic majority and the other is to make sure the majority got reelected.

this afternoon we know we have accomplished both of those and with several seats extra to spare. i think it is important to note the challenge that we had beyond mid term election his plea that always has the president's party losing seats -- which actually beat history last night. since 1930's, world war ii, every time the house of representatives has switched control, the senate has switched control and we beat that history last night by keeping democratic majority in the senate. so, i certainly appreciate that. i appreciate the fact that democrats had a solid night despite the difficult circumstances because our incumbents and candidates across the board of were really focused on the bread and butter issues, the issues people are hurting about, issues people talk around the kitchen table, the issues people wanted to hear. and at our incumbents and the three victorious challenges in

delaware, connecticut, and west virginia were successful because they struck at responsive chord with the state electorate. they focused on jobs, the economy, and spending, and notwithstanding $64 billion in corporate expenditures against them they still prevailed. i think we had a good night considering the totality of the history against us and the economic challenges that we inherited and working assiduously to turn around. i think the results of the election of strengthens our resolve to make sure that we deal with the economic challenges that families are facing. we heard it loud and clear. and we also know this election, while a tough fight is at the end of the day not about political parties. they are about the people who we represent. and that is what we are going to get back to work on starting on the 15th and we look forward to

that opportunity. >> we will take some questions now. >> first in the q i believe is j.t. -- from "the hill." >> thank you for taking my questions. i am wondering if you can look ahead to the name -- lame-duck session and what will come up and potentially the plan for defense of the position which come as no, has the "don't ask don't tell" repeal in it. >> i had a nice conversation with the chairman 11 today and he is anxious to move forward on that. the problem we have with a defense authorization bill is that it takes a while to get it done. if we could get some agreement from the republicans that we could move the bill without a lot of extraneous amendments, i think it is something we can work out. that would be my goal. as to the other things, this conversation here today is not

on tactics for the lame duck with a new congress. what we are here to talk to you today about the election last night -- it is over, it is done. therefore we have to start governing. we are going to have a number of meetings with my caucus before we get into specificities as to what we will do when we get back. there are some things, as everyone knows, cloture and a number of issues, a number of things we have to try to work our way through. i had a very constructive conversation with leader mcconnell in the past hour, and i think that we are going to work well together. to make sure there is a concerted effort by both caucuses to recognize what the election meant. it means that we are going to have to work together, and did anyone tries to take more out of that, i think there will be a big mistake. it is not going to be our way or the highway, their way or the highway, it has to be our way

that gets down the road to success. i think i answered all of your questions. >> next is a family pierce from -- emily peers from "roll call." >> are you there? >> we will go to the next one. naptali -- from "the wall street journal." >> are you there? we seem to be having a problem, you guys. >> one more time. and i think you have to press zero if you want to ask a question. > them anybody there on the line

who wants to ask a question? >> we are -- senators, we are trying to get the questions through. there seems to be a clog. >> i think what we are going to have to do -- it appears with technical difficulties. i mean really sorry -- my >> senator, can you hear me now? >> who is this? >> this is naftali from "the wall street journal." there seem to have been

technical difficulties but they were resolved. you have 59 votes and it was incredibly difficult to get anything done. in the upcoming election -- in the upcoming congress you will be down to 53 or 52. you talked about the importance compromising but certainly from senator mcconnell today, it does not sound like he wants to compromise much unless it is you guys coming his correction. you have of coming senators like rand paul who spoke openly of their need to stick to their principles and not compromise. i am wondering how you manage a caucus like this and a senate like this that was already hard last time around, with these additional difficulties coming of? >> first of all, this whole caucus, this whole congress has not been difficult. this is the easiest team i have never played on. we have worked together. our concern was we had not had input from the republicans. every piece of legislation we

dealt with, all critical to this country, could have been improved with input from republicans. but they said no to everything. and i can't imagine that is going to be there continue on. they can't do that. the american people have already put -- they have already been identified as the party of no. i think the main direction this conversation has been on today and all of the event has been we are willing to work with you, you should be willing to work with us. this is not a one-way street, as i indicated earlier. >> a cake. >> emily pierce? >> senators. i think i've heard you said this before, two years ago, four years ago, we want to work with republicans, and american people are asking for bipartisanship. i questions you is -- kind of what naftali asked as well, if you think you will be able to

govern the governor went what looks like a potentially unruly house majority and emboldened senate minority, anything to ensure, like changing filibuster rules, so you can get bills on to the board? >> emily, first of all, we are not inventing the wheel or even reinventing it. when this government was set up in the 18th century, they knew there would be problems and that is why they made this unique system where we have a house of representatives that has a set of rules and a senate that has a set of rules. this has all happened before. we have the president of one party, senate of the same party, house different party, and we have gotten by and we have done some good things. the message i repeat today is that the ball is in their court. remember, you keep talking about this small majority.

53 over my time in the senate, that is a pretty good majority. and we wish andruss had won, that blanche had won, but we are comfortable where we are. and we read the message very clear that we want to work with republicans. are they are -- if they are not willing to work with us, the american people can see that as a very slow curveball and they will feel the that is what they have been dealt unless they are willing to work with us. >> erin kelly from "reno gazette journal." >> i wanted to ask to senator schuler and durban. there has been speculation about a possible leadership fight. do you support senator harry reid for majority leader again? >> absolutely.

>> sorry, who said that? >> we both did. >> next is corey from dow jones. >> you talk about compromise, senator reid. on the issue of the renewal of bush era tax cuts, are open to compromise, possibly extending all of them for everybody including the wealthy for a short period of time? how do you see that debate going for? >> my conversation with the caucus this morning, wondering what are focused on as a laser is we are going to cut taxes for the middle class. now, i would hope that the republicans will not block that. we are going to work with them. we are not ostriches with heads and our stand in some place. we are willing to pull our head out and look around if they have better ideas. but i think the legislation introduced by my counterpart, mitch mcconnell, where you

extend everything indefinitely, that is a road to a $4 trillion addition to the debt that we have. that won't happen. so, we are willing to keep our ears open, but our main goal is to do everything we can to make sure that the middle class gets their tax cuts that they deserve. one last question. >> dan frame -- dan friedman, national journal. >> and question for senator reid, in terms of helping the middle class and the next congress, specifically has -- have you spoken to boehner over any specific bills, or how to pass a budget with a divided house and senate? >> i have talked to mitch mcconnell. i have not talked to john boehner. i hope to in the next hour or two, but the time difference in ohio and washington is much

different than here. i did the morning shows at 4:00 a.m. this morning so i am still trying to talk to john. we had a longstanding good relationship. i found him to be a consensus die, and the statements he made last night i thought were -- i found to be a consensus guy, and the statements he made last night i thought were the john boehner i know. thanks, everybody. host: you have been listening to a conference call with the senate democratic leaders, harry reid of nevada, reelected in that state last night. senator dick durbin and chuck schumer and senator menendez, who headed up the senate democratic campaign committee. reporters primarily from newspapers and publications based here in washington. and look at some of the results this morning. "the denver post" presented this

headline, about hickenlooper o. a grateful bennet winning senate race. he received about 48% sign of the vote to 47% for can book -- ken buck. a democratic hold an, roddick. "the l.a. times" with the results of the california senate race. barbara boxer getting just under 50% nearly 45% 4 carly fiorina. today the former ceo of hewlett- packard conceding. she also tweeted it, and if you want to read it, it is available on c-span.org. here is the republican senate candidate from california earlier this afternoon.

[applause] >> good morning. good morning. well, good morning, everyone. thank you for joining us. last night at around 11:15 p.m. when i talked with hundreds of our supporters, the outcome of this election was not yet clear, but this morning the outcome is clear. i have spoken with senator boxer, congratulated her and wished her well. we had an exceptional campaign. i am so proud of our base of supporters, so many republicans across this state worked hard, got out, voted, got others to go. we won with independents, but in the end, we could not overcome the registration advantage that

democrats have, and in particular, in l.a. county. i am not going to engage in a game of could have been, would have, should have. i am proud of every moment of this campaign. and proud as well out of every person who has contributed to our efforts. i am proud of every single one of our professional staff. we had a fantastic campaign team. i am proud of every single one of our volunteers, whether they were driving the cars, manning the cameras, getting out the vote, sitting in phone banks, knocking on doors. i am proud of every single one of the tens of thousands of people who put their hearts and their hope and their passion and their commitment into this campaign. i am proud as well of every one

of our tens of thousands of donors, people all up and down this state, people all across the nation, who gave generously to our cause. i have said on many occasions throughout this campaign that win, lose, or draw, i would not trade a single moment, and that remains true this morning. this has been a great privilege in my life. we have seen california in a way that so few people have an opportunity to see it. it is a beautiful state. it is rightly called golden state. yes, a state with many challenges, but a golden state because of the heart and soul of the people of this great state. and i have met so many of them. and i have been touched by every single one of them.

and it has been a privilege as well because of all of the people who have poured their love, their prayer is, their support, and their heart into our cause. when i first part of this campaign about a year ago, almost a year ago exactly, as a matter of fact. as many of you may remember, i was bald. i have a little more here now. one thing we accomplished. but one we started this campaign a year ago i said two things. i said that i believe ours was intended to be citizen government. that is what of, by, for the people means. and i am so proud of the fact that so many citizens stepped forward to run for office for the first time all across the nation. i also said i was running

because i thought the american dream was becoming too hard for too many people. i hold that concern today. our country was founded on a truly radical idea, the idea that everyone has potential, that everyone has a right to fulfil their potential, and that everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. and in this country, we believe that those rights, from god, not man, and cannot be taken away by government. but to live the american dream, people need opportunity. and they need the freedom to pursue those opportunities. and they need a government that is working on their side and listening to them. to live the american dream, people need jobs and day -- we need to put 2.3 million californians back to work. and to live the american dream

as well we cannot have a government that continues to spend out of control money that is not its own, but the taxpayers' money, and in particular, we cannot have a government that continues to spend the treasure of future generations, our children and our grandchildren. so i hope for everyone who was victorious last night -- everyone, from barbara boxer to all of the many people who won last night across our nation, whether they are democrats or whether they are republican, i hope all will come together in the capital of our nation in washington, d.c., in the capital of our state, sacramento, i hope all of these people will come together and redouble their efforts to make sure that californians and americans have opportunities, have opportunities to live at the american dream. because when you destroy jobs, when people are unemployed, it is not just that they don't

have a paycheck. they are missing their chance to live the american dream. they are losing their ability to build a better life for themselves and their family. so, i hope everyone will rededicate themselves to building those opportunities for everyone who needs an opportunity. and i hope as well that democrats and republicans will come together now in our nation's capital as well as the state's capital and say, you know, we need to work together now to do the people's business. we need to get out of control government spending under control. we need to remember always that is not our money that the government spends, it is the people's money. and when we spend the money of future generations, we are doing harm. this has been a great ride, a great adventure, a great privilege. i would not trade a single moment. and for every single person who gave of their time, who gave of

their hearts, who gave of their money, who gave of their passion, frank and i want to thank you from the bottom of our hearts. the fight is not over, the fight is just beginning. now let's go make sure that what we know to be true is true going forward, that the american dream belongs to everyone and that the government works for us, not the other way around. god bless you all, and thank you. [applause] host: from irvine, california, carly fiorina, the republican senate candidate conceding the race to barbara boxer who goes on to a fourth term. a headline from "sacramento bee ." and look at the numbers. 52% for barbara boxer, 43% for republican candidates and

libertarian candidate getting 2 percent of the book. we will have coverage of today's event in a prime-time schedule starting at 8:00 eastern time. all of the speeches and the events today, including the president's news conference and the comments you heard earlier from senators dick durbin and harry reid and senator bob menendez from a conference call and this morning, the speaker elect john boehner likely to become the next republican speaker of the house of representatives, his comments also available at our website c- span.org. morning more of your phone calls and a reaction from "washington journal" that gets away at set up -- it's underway at 7:00 a.m. eastern time. up next, a series of panel events response today. one including charlie cook which handicapped the midterm with 60 republican seats. he was accurate. also predicting six or seven senate seats for republicans. also it correct prediction from charlie cook. but up next, the panel

discussion that includes the head of the afl-cio. former members of the house of representatives, jim nestle, bart gordon, and republican norma coleman who, by the way, considered as a possible candidate for chair of the republican national committee challenging michael steele. here is the national journal event from earlier today to continue our post-election coverage. >> is this working yet? >> i would like to start with

mr. duncan. what happened last night? >> first, it is great open -- national journal has put this on. what a difference a day makes? what happened last night, it was a mega-tsunami. you have to go back to 1948 when there were 70 seats that changed to find a house that made more changes. but it was more than a house, more than the senate. you have to look at the state legislatures and governors across the country. we have probably 19 bodies of blood -- legislature, maybe 10 governors. -- -- redistricting process coming will be from our standpoint more fair because we have the decision making process. those are the facts. what happened? last night the people spoke. i believe a rejection of the obama administration did two years ago when i stood before some of you at the national press club and talked about what happened then, i accepted

responsibility for the defeat, congratulated president-elect obama and said we were a center- right country, which we still are and warned that if we lurched on the left and choked on the bone of responsibility, republicans will be back. i think he did, his agenda was overreaching, and that is what happened. >> mr. trumka, how do you read last night's selections? >> the corporate agenda and groups like american crossroad had a good day and the question is, why. obviously i disagree with what my friend michael said in a lot of ways. yesterday the issue that people drove them to vote was about jobs and the economy. and it wasn't because they bought on to the pledge to american, because if you look at it, we don't have all the data analyzed yet. we are going to be doing a call at noon time so of any of you who choose to find out the rest of the data, please feel free to

join our call at noon. if you look at it, we went through all of the issues. 63% of the people in those congressional races, 100 races, opposed, for instance, tax breaks for people over $250,000. 62% of them oppose privatizing social security. we went through that, and if you looked at even the republican voters, the exact figure, a matter of fact, 65% knew little or nothing about the pledge to america. so, this is the third consecutive cycle where the people and power had been kicked out of power because of frustration. i think they're reading from last night is, the american people know the economy does not work. there are suffering, angry because of that, and you are going to have to, now that you are part of the governing structure, you are going to have

to come up with a way to create jobs and get the economy back on the move. because i think they are frustrated, not because of too much of stuff, but because too little was done. and as a result of that i would have to say that the republican strategy of stopping everything probably had an effect, it works. but now that you will be in the governing structure, you will not be able to just say no. you will have to come up with ideas and create jobs. and hopefully we can do that together. that is our ultimate goal. >> you are essentials are growing that voters -- arguing that the voters were not for the republican party but against the democrats. >> it was against the party in power at different levels. if they believe that their agenda was embraced, i think they will be short-lived where they are right now. because there was an anger about not getting the job done. now they are part of getting the job done and now they will have

to come up with something that says here is how we create jobs. and they will actually create jobs, we will probably join with you because it is good for america. >> i hope so. and i agree with you it is about the economy, but it is about the obama administration not paying enough attention to the economy. i think we will present policies -- a tax policy, for example, that goes along with the monetary policy. the fed today will take more action on trying to put more money into the system. but we have to balance the budget. we have to get government spending and it under control. that is what people were talking about. the understand that that is part of what makes up the technology of jobs in the country. when you suppress small businesses by keeping them in the dark about what the policy is going to be -- we don't know what the tax rate is going to be -- it hurts creation of jobs at the very local level. >> michael, would you also help us stop the outsourcing, rewarding companies that take

jobs offshore and start rewarding companies to create jobs here at home? >> let's stick with analyzed the vote last night. would you agree with mr. trumka that the results last night were not a validation of republican but rather a rejection of democrats? >> the people of this country are giving us a chance and we will take advantage of that. look, we messed up. ayotte knowledge that in 2008 and in 2006. we had an opportunity and we did not listen enough. i think you saw the republican party listen this time and that is part of the pledge to america. they understand america's -- americans are hurting and out of work. the new misery index has to do with foreclosure rate and unemployment. that is the change and we get it. >> both of you have been involved in organizations that spend millions on this election. mr. trumka, one of the few

bright spots for democrats last night was that where there was this seven-point swing nationally toward the republican party, among union households, it was only four points. i know the afl-cio was talking a lot of successes in places like west virginia, several districts in pennsylvania. talk a little bit about the affects the afl-cio and other labor groups have had on the democratic effort. >> first of all, we don't have all of the data analyzed, so i can give you a state-by-state or race by race analysis. but overall i think our members voted for progressive candidates by about 30% margin. in places like nevada, it was higher. i think it was 69-29, that we voted for harry reid. in west virginia it would have been hired as well for joe mansion. -- manhin. we made millions of phone calls, pieces of mail, door knocks.

you will see in a demographic out of demographic, if you are a union member you voted for progressive candidate and if you were not a union member, you voted the other way. you will get to see that today pretty graphically. we think we did our job and what we were supposed to do, and our members voted overwhelmingly for candidates that are going to support working people. >> mr. duncan, american crossroads is one of these new super pacs, as they call them did you have been involved in races all over the country. talk a little bit about the effect outside groups have had. >> first of all, let me tell you we are using the labor union model. the outside organizations set up in 2000 for and in 2006. and i congratulate bridge because he did turn out his people, and we are working on that. we were able to be involved in eight senate races. we focused on senate races. we exceeded our budget.

millions of dollars in television advertising, mail, phone calls. we are not as good as you are on deployment we are working on that. we did experiments. we think we made a difference. we were involved early on in nevada. we think we kept it close. we were able to target our efforts. we work early on in arkansas, missouri, pennsylvania, we worked in colorado. we were involved all over the country. toward the and we did some house races. but it is acknowledgments that the outside groups on the democrats' side have done a good job over the last three cycles and we are just now catching up. >> you did more than catch up because conservative groups outspent progressive groups 2 to 1 yesterday. >> it is interesting because they may have outspent some liberal leaning groups on television, but it seems like a lot of union money went to ground operations.

why did the ground game instead of blanketing the airwaves? >> we think that is our job. our members trust us when we talk to them one on one, and we did do a good job. want to -- not one penny of afl- cio money went to candidates. it went to the ground up into members. we probably touched our members between 15 and 20 times in this election in one form or another. whether a mailing from the local union, or from us, or whether it was a phone call or a door not for leaflet. we probably touched them 15 to 20 times and made a difference. we see the demographics, it made a difference with everybody because we have members who are born again, members who are ultra conservative, members who are just the rest of society. except when we give them the facts and give them the information they need to make a

decision, it makes a big difference. >> let me set the record straight on monday. over the last three cycles the democrat groups have outspent the republican groups more than 2 to 1, and even this cycle, we are still catching up. we are still not there. >> let us talk about what it means going forward. mr. duncan, you were reported in "the new york times" that this was a practice run for 2012. both sides spent far more than the democratic national committee or republican national committee or the appropriate associated committees and house and senate. it is evidence that the outside groups are becoming more powerful and more influential than the party organizations? >> let us put in perspective. let us talk about how much was spent on potato chips, $7 billion. how much was spent last week on halloween according to the national retail federation. if i had candy i would give to both on mute -- of you.

candy and costumes, $5.8 billion. in totality this time we will spend about $4 billion on politics. most of that will be spent by the campaigns and the party committees. i think outside groups spent about $400 million. i don't think there is too much money in politics. i think we don't invest enough in democracy. >> speaking of potato chips, the country also spent more on the tickets than energy research last year, which i find quite appalling. >> what do you think about site spending? does it mean labor organizations and groups like american cross roads are becoming more powerful and influential than the democratic and republican national committee's? >> i think there are two issues. one issue is not just how much money was spent, but who spent it. you have these wonderful sound and croats and then when you combine the amount that corporations spend on lobbying, that they spend on the

election, you dwarfed us in all of that. the question is, who is spending the money. some of your money came from foreign sources. >> that is absolutely not true. you cannot say that because it is not true. i went to every -- through every donation. we got our money from individuals all over the country, from $25, to a large donations. >> are you willing to put that list out? then are you willing to talk about where the -- >> we've got our -- >> let us stay focused on the election. >> to disclose all of that? >> moving quickly, mr. trumka, let us talk more specifically, last night clearly a rejection of the democratic initiatives of the last couple of years or at least the fact that those initiatives have not turned the economy fast enough. what does it mean in your mind for president obama going

forward as he begins his reelection campaign in 2012? >> i think he should do what we are going to do. as of today we will have three priorities. jobs, jobs, and more jobs. we will be pushing our five- point plan to create the jobs but i think the president ought to do that. he ought to put the guys to the test. they said they can do it now let us make them do it. i wish you success because for every job you create, there is an american out there who will be able to make a living and hopefully build part of the middle-class. i would tell him to stick to the jobs -- to his principles. to work with them but not compromise principles. >> to work with house republicans? >> absolutely. they should have been working with us and the senate republicans have been working with us and they didn't. their strategy seems like it worked. i am hoping we did not repay that strategy. i say try to work with them, if a but not caused you principles. it cost you principles you have to stand for principle. but create jobs and put them to

the test. if it is the same worn old stuff, which they said during the campaign, we will cut more taxes for the rich, we will deregulate, the same policies that got us into this mess, that is not going to make -- a line >> president obama had a historic election and he did not reach out and work with republicans. when you talk about putting us in the back of the bus, when you talk about enemies list, when you tell a leader of the congress, we want, get it. that is not reaching across the aisle. i was glad to see he made calls last night to speaker elect boehner and to senator mcconnell and i hope it is a good omen. but to get to the jobs in need, we got to have palaces -- policies in this country, including tax policies that encourage small businesses. john boehner understands the american dream. you saw it last night in his emotional response. he came up and a small business, created his own small business.

>> mr. duncan, what republicans have said, a large number of them -- kevin mccarthy from california, mike pence from indiana, and even eric cantor hinted that republicans should not compromise, that they should take the same tack that president obama did and say elections have consequences. >> i was not uncompromising, i was talking about working with tax policies. >> should republicans to negotiate with president obama? >> i think we should sit down and work together. work what -- but what american people were talking about. deficit spending. we need certainty to create jobs. that means president obama has to move from the left back to the center. this is a center-right country. >> a quick follow up. an amazing statistic somebody brought to my attention. one-quarter of the house republican conference is new, a freshman. somewhere around 80 members once

all the chips fall. is that a problem for john boehner? there is a massive new influx of populist members coming into congress. is he going to have the same kind of control over them than, say, then as pastor and the leadership team had over that republican -- than dennis hastert? >> 80 new members it is an opportunity for people to read the bills, opportunity to legislate more, an opportunity to let congress work the way it is supposed to work. >> mr. trumka, what do you think of the democratic agenda we saw in the 111th. one bogyman a lot of republicans talk about all the time and warned about was the employee free choice act. democrats didn't move on that. but that have an impact last night or during the campaign

season getting labor to turn out for democrats? >> a one to answer that but i also want to comment on what michael said. michael said they were not given a chance to corporate or government. there were 424 bills passed by the house of representatives sent to the senate's and the senate had a record number of filibuster's where they did not try to compromise. they just would not let debate go on. >> including cap and trade, something we probably agreed should not. >> the point in, if democrats respond in kind right now we will not get the job done that we need. but it will take us in taking the first step. you had a chance to govern and you said no to everything that came down but you didn't say, let's sit down and negotiate it out, you said, no, and you filibustered. i think that was one of the most outrageous things the country has seen to stop progress. and hopefully we will not see that in the future.

did the employee free choice act have a dampening effect? probably early on it did because there paul was an enthusiasm gap early on. but the more information we gave them and the more progress we showed them that was made in -- reining in wall street, progress on health care, the different things that were done, i think it had less effect. will we continue to fight for it? absolutely. the reason why we continue to fight for it is it is a very essential part to recovery. our factory is 72% driven by consumer spending. if people don't have money in their pockets, they can't spend. to compensate over the last 30 years, they borrowed. we know there is an end to that. consumers can borrow any more. if you believe that corporate america out of the goodness of their heart is going to start sharing more money but the vast number of workers in this country, i have oceanfront

property in southwestern pennsylvania that i will sell you. what we need is is the ability to sit down with our employers so we can work together, that we can be profitable together, we can share and a profit and then build an economy from the bottom up. >> can you agree that they have and have an environment entrust the government where they will invest capital? back during the depression there was a period of time when capital was not being invested. we've got to allow the money to get out there because the small business -- not wall street -- but small business creates most of the jobs. >> and small business is starting. they need those banks to start lending. that is one of our programs, the five planks of job creation, getting paid back tarp money into the hands of regional banks to start lending to smaller and mid-sized businesses so they can start creating jobs. >> people are not applying for

the small business loans because of the uncertainty. >> let's go back to something you brought up, the tarp vote clearly had a big impact on the election. largely on mr. duncan's side of the aisle. lost hisob bennett' primary, and senator lisa rakowski lost her primary but she may have won anyway -- lisa murkowski lost a primary but she may have won anyway. but it is not clear if that is the reason they lost. what impact, mr. duncan, do you see those against tarp, i guess it is fair to call them the tea party said, what affect would have on the republican party going forward? >> it was a giant motivator on the republican side because it was ill-conceived and carried out. there were some good results but it was part of the government

overreaching and big government and more deficit spending. annette synergize the lot of people in this country that have never been involved -- and that energized a lot of the people in this country that have never been involved. >> 20 of the 54 blue dogs loss last night. it this was all about ideology they should have won and they didn't. it is too complex and too simplistic to look at a race and say this -- it is far more complex. i think there is an anger because this economy, people are hurting. more and more americans are hurting. 15 million people are unemployed, 11 million more underemployed, six and a half million unemployed for greater than six months. they are angry and they want action. i can tell you, michael, that if you don't start the action and we don't start the action, it will be the

48 and 1950. are we getting into an unusually volatile time in american politics? >> it usually is. some refer back to the less sick tree with the changes in government. we had a change in 2008, and we're having change in direction, change in the shift this time. we get that. i had a chance last night to talk to leader boehner about some of the programs he is putting forward. that is a great opportunity for the republican party and conservative principles. get back to the basics. do not spin more than you have. look at with the governors are doing. i think barbara had did a great job articulating that. we cannot cut back the size of government. we can have a more efficient government. we can help create an environment that helps small businesses produce jobs in the country. that is what you hear us talking about.

health care reform. because such a dramatic impact it had on us. you will hear us talk about cap and trade. it destroyed the competitive advantage in many parts of the country. these are opportunities for us to put conservative principles forward. >> are we seeing a newly volatile elections? >> absolutely. people want action. they're fed up and frustrated. they want action. if you want to listen to them, this is what they set last night. 85% of them said allowing health insurance denial for pre- existing conditions, they were against that. 75% were against reducing or eliminating the minimum wage. 72% were against eliminating the the barn with of education did a 60% were against raising the social security retirement age. 63% were against cutting taxes for those who make more than $ 250,000. that is what they said last night in the 100 congressional

districts that swung the election but as i do hope you listen. >> i think there are other questions on there. do you want a smaller and more efficient government? i think people do. we have to create a new environment in this country. >> i have one question. everybody keeps talking about smaller government. what would you eliminate from this government, and do not say waste generically, what would you eliminate? >> let's leave the policies of to the policy guys. i want to ask a sort of a question that we will all be asking ourselves over the next few days, and everybody will be sort of predating there on actual knowledge. when did you know that the house was going to fall into republican hands? >> i think we started seeing that in the early spring. we started seeing indications at that point. the quality of the candid its. i remember speaker boehner came

to lexington, ky in april and talked to the group about 100 house seats that he thought would be in place. people were laughing, but we knew. there had been a great effort to recruit quality candidate -- candidates, and we saw the mood of the country moving in a different direction. so we started to believe that there would be a change in the congress. >> did you have any premonitions of this was coming? >> yeah, we saw the citizen united case decided and more money flowing into this election and there was a loyal in the gulf. that is when we started to figure that it would be a problem. >> that is absolutely not true. he continued to outspend us. >> that is just preposterous. >> we will give you the statistics on this. and put it in the national journal. >> you obviously read what is a matter with kansas. you create a reality -- >> we only have time for one more question. the tea party has influenced the

republicans and brought this new populist mood. where do you see republicans going from here, and how are they going to avoid what is forecast as another cycle in which the bums get kicked up? >> it has energized the republican party. use of the turnout yesterday. you'll see these people come in with fresh ideas. i think it bodes well for the future of the country, because we want more people involved in our government. we need to have more money and people involved in politics. i think it will be assimilated within the party. the party will be much better off for the fact that we had this movement. >> where does the democratic party go from here? you just lost more seats than any party since 1948. how'd you get back into the fight? >> first of all, the operative word he said as he believes that

there should be more money in politics. i do not know if you got that. >> to catch up. >> i personally believe there's too much money in politics. there should be more policy debate or actual talk about policies rather than trying to destroy people and destroy their character. where do they go? back to the simple notion of jobs, jobs, jobs, and more jobs. fought for jobs. 5 for the reauthorization of the transportation act. pfeifer the clean water act. fight for the clean energy act. it will help solve a problem in this country, and it will help create jobs. there should be a major investment in infrastructure. that is a 10-year time span. so that we can crowd in private money into the process and fix the problem. we have paid $2.2 trillion and for stricter deficit. we need to fix that. the only way to do it is to go after it and make a long-term commitment. they should make that commitment and forced votes on job bills. stay true to their principles.

work with the other side if it does not cost to your principles. and if it does, then you have to pull up and fight for what you believe in. >> all right, thank you both for joining us this morning. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> he was with me all night last night as was said and scream at each other across a loud news room. jeremy, what happened last night? >> first, i would like to said that think we will probably agree on more things right now than they be the last palace. i wanted to point out a couple things. for all the talk about how bad it was for democrats, i want to point out a couple examples

where democrats can maybe take solace. there were two trios in the house that i like to point out. iowa and a trio that all held on. those were targets and i probably would have thought when two of them would have flipped. there was one in north carolina that also held on in kind of a surprising way. of course, the flip side to that argument is that bob etheridge, who no one thought was going to fall about two weeks ago, did lose last night in north carolina. other places california -- democrats did well are california governor. at the beginning of this cycle, there's a lot of reservations about jerry brown and about meg whitman and her pocketbook. the big win from them was that it is a very important for the going interest to it -- redistricting. the other one i would like to

point out is -- >> one thing, jerry brown had probably the best victory speech of the night. he said as the rally into this politics thing. and i thought, so are we. [laughter] >> he had some of the best camp paid ads in the cycle. two of them, he actually used meg whitman's own words against her. in one, the tide her as well as an island to another politician. the talked about arnold schwarzenegger and played clips of them saying exactly the same words. it went back and forth to the rest all of them. it was a very effective that. yes are remiss not to mention the nevada sen. it is almost hard to overstate how big a went the nevada senate was for democrats. in mid of the prognosticators, myself included, look like idiots. everyone had written off harry reid. that was a huge win there and in

west virginia with joe manchin. those are big wins for democrats. >> one of the great joys of working at the hot line is every morning you get to sort through a good 2,000 clips so we can bring you the best news of the day. i had my doubts about harry reid and his reelection bid up one guy who did not was a fantastic political analyst from nevada. a lot of states have that one guy who knows this thing better than anybody else and nobody knows about it better than john. he said harry reid would win by three points. he was actually shot by two points. >> harry reid over performed john ralston. that is a big feed in nevada. what else around the country injured democrats had a few bright spots -- but in the long run, this is a pretty historic defeat? >> one thing to point out is the number of two party candidates

and candidates backed by senator jim demand that one last debt. not all of them did. christine o'donnell loss. one lost from west virginia. but including demint, there will be six senators in the senate that will be part of that pocket. he gave substantial resources to them. that gives him a tremendous amount of bargaining power and leverage. if ken buck wins in colorado, that would be a seventh. you're approaching a 10th of that the senate being aligned with jim demint. demint said he is not going to run for president, but this gives him all sorts of bargaining power in the senate. >> yet, of the six seats that republicans have picked up, four are decidedly not friends of jim demint. rob portman in ohio. kirk in illinois.

one from indiana and another from north dakota. demint did not play in ohio or north dakota. he thought about getting involved in the illinois race. did he get involved in that? >> he did but a very long time ago. >> and he did get involved for the indian a primary who got beat. he lugged up this year and ended up slipping into the seat -- he lucked out. he ended up in another seat. anyway, four of the six them are these sort of establishment candidates. does that tell you that the two- party movement has been overrated or not? >> if you look at the demint candidates that lost, the two party candidates help democrats maintain a majority with christine o'donnell in delaware running the republican chances there.

but for what it means as far as governing those and looking forward, it is hard to say. but i think one of the counter intuitive arguments is this class can be more willing to compromise with democrats as the incoming class as suggested for multi-party rhetoric. rob portman is a great example. someone who understands the government and his more moderate. he was in congress. those are the people that harry reid and democrats would probably reach out to. of course, that is a very counter to the rhetoric that jim demint has put out there. >> and the incoming members, marco rubio as been a conservative, but he was the legislature, too. he was speaker of the house. it takes and to get along there. >> he sort of moved to the center after charlie crist got out of the republican party, and

he became the de facto front runner in that case. so he is another one that might be more moderate than people anticipate. >> all right, give me the unreported story, the story that we have not seen emerge yet. >> well, the first thing that comes to mind right now is that harry reid, dick durbin, and chuck schumer will be having a press conference this afternoon to discuss the fate of the democratic party in the senate. the first thing that came to my mind was how angry probably made chuck schumer. [laughter] think what you will, but chuck schumer also funneled a lot of money to the state party of nevada that helps harry reid. but i do not -- dick durbin is also a possible candidate as senate majority leader harry reid lost. it will be an interesting press conference to watch. >> and at least it provides and harmony in the house that

accommodate durbin and sexual lives together. those could be the interest were made to get seats for a while. i think the big untold story here is the simple fact that a good campaign run at the right time can actually win but not all the time. look at harry reid. he ran essentially a perfect campaign. so did a couple of members, joe donnelly in indiana. >> one that i would add to that is the one that actually lost, but he ran an extremely strong campaign in a district that had no reason for them to elect a democrat this year. in that race a lot closer. he ran a very strong campaign. >> one interesting point that we're pointing out in our spotlight, for a preview now, is that the notion that the trifecta of senate seats, the sort of symbolic senate seats the republicans thought they could pick up a while ago, the illinois seat, held by president

obama, once held by president obama. the delaware seat. and the nevada seat. the lesson i think from those three -- three very different lessons. in illinois, you that president obama dear of thing he could in a place where he was most popular. but voters were so dissatisfied with government could a 65% of illinois voters tell exit pollsters they were either dissatisfied with their anger with the federal government. it is almost impossible, no matter how popular york, to overcome that, even in a state like illinois. leggett the members in illinois. bill foster -- look at the members in illinois. there's a good possibility even melissa been and will be looking for new jobs. and by the way, the seat that was supposed to go to democrat, the republicans won at sea last night, too. so there are few states that turned out worse for democrats and president obama's own state.

and then you look at a state like delaware were the tea party candidate came in and really robert republicans, not only of one seat, but some house republicans of them might even have a chance of keeping that senate seat with the right primary nominee. that right primary nominee lost, along with congressman mike castle. and democrats picked up the two seats. i think the talks a lot about the dangers republicans is going forward if they continue purifying the party. finally, look at nevada. every now and then a perfect campaign can be overcome, even with terrible approval ratings. three different states. somehow it is fitting that illinois was the state actually flipped to republicans. >> unmentioned the the place where democrats can take solace today, just one example about how bad it was. in wisconsin last night, the democrats lost the governorship, lost the senate, lost the senate

seat, lost two house seats, lost both chambers of the state legislature all in one night. and this is a state that voted for the democrat in the presidential election, the six last presidential elections. that is so much, assuming a blue states like wisconsin, can change. >> thanks so much. we encourage you to look at your hot line which will be at will before you get out of this session today. thanks for your time. [applause] >> a live picture of the u.s. capitol on the day after the midterm elections. ramifications' will be played out in next congress. it is not the only news being made today. the federal reserve today announced, and this is a story out of the "washington post," announcing plans to pump hundreds of billions of dollars into the u.s. financial system, an expansive new effort to try to get the sputtering u.s.

economy on track. the fed will print money to buy treasury bonds, an extra $600 billion worth by june of next year, in a move to lower long- term interest rates. that action should make it cheaper for americans to borrow money, take out a mortgage, or refinance their house. and for businesses to borrow money to expand. the action, while wide lee and his ability, was somewhat more aggressive than analysts expected. last night's voting put republicans in control of the u.s. house and also ended up with the gop gaining several seats in the u.s. senate. earlier today, republican leaders met with the press to discuss the results. this lasts about 15 minutes.

>> we are humbled by the trust that the american people placed in us. we recognize that this is a time for us to roll up our sleeves and go to work on the people's priorities. creating jobs, cutting spending, and reforming the way congress does its business. it is not just with the american people are demanding. it is what they're expecting from us. the real question now is this, are we going to listen to the american people? republicans have made a pledge to america, and their pledges to listen to the american people and to focus on their priorities. and that is exactly what we're

going to do. last night, the president was kind enough to call me. we discussed working together on the american people's priorities. cutting spending, creating jobs. and we hope that he will continue to be willing to work with us on those priorities. does the bulk -- but as i said last night, the new majority of congress will be the voice of the american people, and i think we clearly expressed that last night. we're going to continue and renew our efforts for a smaller, less costly, and more accountable government in washington, d.c. i also want to say thanks to my two colleagues. as most of you know, and can -- senator mcconnell and i have worked closely together over the last five years or so. and barber and i have been friends over the last 20 years. we have a real partnership to i

am proud to stand here with both of them. >> at the risk that this sounded like a mutual admiration society, let me also say what a pleasure it has been to work with john the last four years in our leadership roles. i, too, have known our great friend for 20 years here. and this is a happy day for the three of us. let me make a few observations as well. we are indeed humbled and ready to listen to the american people and to lead on the issues that they have clearly indicated they care about. we're determined to stop the agenda americans have rejected and to turn the ship around. we will work with the administration when they agree with the people and confront them when they do not. choosing i think what our friends on the other side learned is that choosing the president over your constituents is not a good strategy. this election yesterday was

clearly a referendum on the administration and the democratic majority here in the congress, ignoring the voters and their wishes, as you could see during the entire two-year time span produces predictable results. in the health care bill, in my view, was a metaphor for the government excess that we witnessed over the last two years. the american people watched the government running banks, insurance companies, car companies, taking over the student loan business. and then they said it they're taking health care as well. i think it became the tipping point during the course of the last two years. i would say to our friends on the other side of the aisle in listening to what it had to say this morning, they may have missed the message somewhat. i get the impression their view is we have not cooperated enough. i think what the american people were saying yesterday is that

they appreciated us saying in notes to the things that the american people indicated there were not in favor of. so i think the group that should profligate the message out of yesterday's elections is our friends on the other side of the aisle. we hope that they will give it in a different direction, work with us on things like spending and debt and trade agreements and nuclear power and technology and other things the president has said that he is for, the most of my members are for. still, the question is, how do we meet in the middle? it seems to me the best strategy for the other side would be to listen to the voters yesterday. they made a clear statement about what they would like to see done. if the president comes in our direction, obviously we want to make progress over the next two years for the country. with that, let me turn to governor barbaber.

>> thank you. on behalf of republican governors, while governors' races may be thought of as being separate are very different from what is going on in washington, in this case, even in governor's races, this election was a referendum on obama's policies and the policies of the obama administration, the pelosi/harry reid congress was repudiated by the voters. governors and i would say, a lot of democratic governors i believe will agree with this, going forward, governors believe that we can work with the congress to try to set things in a better direction. the voters yesterday voted against excessive spending, piling up deficits, trillions of dollars of new debt being loaded on our children and grandchildren. huge tax increase right around the corner in january. in a government-run health care

system. we, governors, because almost all of us have to have a balanced budget, we have to cut spending. i can remember when my career in washington was going on. a spending cut was at the department of budget was supposed to go up 8%. it only went up 5%. so that was a 3% cut. in a state governments, we have learned to make real cuts, and we have learned to do it while providing services. and i hope that will be something that will be an example for the new congress. we look forward to working with them and appreciate their support in helping us get here. thank you. >> you spoken to nancy pelosi today? and how do seers of integrating all the tea party activism into the culture of this? >> the speaker tended to reach me this morning, left me a very nice voice bell, and i expect that we will have been very smooth transition with her

office. what unites us as republicans will be the agenda of the american people. and if we're listening to the american people, i do not see any problems incorporating the members of the two-party along with our party in the quest that is really the same. they want us to cut spending and focus on creating jobs in america. >> what you think the prospects are for this year congress during the tax-cut renewal, and would you be open to some sort of left wing from the continuation? >> we continue to believe that extending all the current tax rates for all americans is the right policy for our economy at this time. >> what made you cry last night? [laughter] can you bring stability back to the house? >> most of you know that it is a

little difficult to talk about my background and talk about my family, and i thought i was going to be in good shape but not as good as it turned out. >> the exit polls last night said that 53% of americans have an unfavorable view of the republican party, almost the same as the democratic party. so what does that tell you about how you have to govern? >> it tells me what we need to do is listen to the american people. they sent a very loud message last night. not only to the house and to the senate. but if you look at the number of republican governors that one, the number of republican legislative bodies that one, it is clear that the american people want a smaller, less costly, more campbell government here in washington, d.c. and of the american people see us doing things that they're telling us to do, i think we will do just fine. >> i know that -- i know that all of you have been reading --

[inaudible] what do take away from that? how do you govern differently this time? how does it affect what you will do in the senate without a majority? >> i think it is a poor and to listen to the american people. they're more americans engaged in our government today than i have ever seen in my lifetime. i think the real key to having real success for the american people is to keep the american people engaged in this process beyond last night. the government will do exactly what the american people demand every day. nothing more, nothing less. if they stay engaged in the process. i am very hopeful that they will. >> i will address that. i think clearly, the election yesterday did not transfer full control of the government to the opposition. it was a first step in the

direction of changing what we have been doing in washington. their two opportunities for that change to occur. our friends on the other side can change them and work with us to address the issues that are important to the american people that we all understood. or further change obviously can have a 90,012. but in the meantime, we were sent here to work on the people's business. and over in the senate or the majority is not enough in any event and it takes 60 votes to do most things, it is clear that we're going to have to have some kind of bipartisan agreement. hopefully that will be on the issues of spending and debt, which is what the american people are asking us to address. i anticipate, we will see, but i anticipate enough democrats to come in our direction on spending and debt to where we can make progress for the american people. >> and there was differing points of view in their conference about what to do

about earmarks and -- [inaudible] to raise are not raise the debt limit. how are you going to be about to operationally do some of these things when they're competing factions in your conference on what to do on these issues? >> that is what the transition as four. time to figure out how to do the big things in the to be done on behalf of the american people. >> can you talk more about your conversation with the president? did you discuss any areas of comment agreement are due -- are there any? >> we have never pleasant conversation. we agreed that we needed to listen to the american people. we needed to work together on behalf of the american people. and i look forward to having an opportunity to talk with them about those areas where wcan>> e president right now? >> the next congress, it looks like one of the early tests will be decreasing the debt limit.

how will you work with others to achieve that? >> we will be working that out over the next couple months. >> will you try to go to 2008 spending levels during the lame duck? >> i believe that operating under the 2008 levels of spending, before the bailout and before the stimulus, is a responsible way forward. >> are you going to continue the you cut program, formalize the link between american people on line and your administration in the capital? >> we're going to continue to talk to the american people every day, and we're going to continue to listen to the american people every day. programs like you cut and america speaking up and some other ideas we will outline in the coming days will be intended to provide the american people a forum and a vehicle to talk to us so that we can listen every day. >> we know that house

republicans have pledged to repeal and replace the president's health care reform. you have an upcoming appropriations process do you plan to try to use that appropriation process to fund the reform law? >> i believe that the health- care bill that was enacted by the current congress will kill jobs in america, ruin the best health-care system in the world, and being grumped our country. that means we have to do everything we can -- and bankrupt our country. we have to do everything we can bring common sense reforms to bring down the cost of all the insurance. >> on financial reform, the dodd-frank rule, do you hope to change that? [inaudible] >> i think one of the things that congress has not done a good job of over the last 15 years israel over said. and i'm not talking about gotcha over said peter i am

talking about rock-solid oversight of the executive branch was a constitutional responsibility of the conference. i think when it comes to the financial-services bill and the 358 regulatory filings required under that bill, that it is going to require a significant amount of oversight. so not only will the congress understand, but the american people understand just what this bill will do to our financial services industry. thank you all very much. >> did you answer the question about the concession of the gop?

>> republican leaders earlier today, there were not the only ones reacting to last night's election results. president obama also remarked on the voting from the east room of the white house. this is just under an hour. >> the afternoon, everybody. last out i reached out to those who both won and lost in both parties. i told john boehner and mitch mcconnell but i look forward to working with them, and i thanked nancy pelosi and harry reid for their extraordinary leadership over the last two years. after what i am sure was a long night for a lot of you, and needless to say it was for me, i

can tell you that, you know, some election nights are more fun than others. some are its ziller rating. some are humbling. -- some are exhilarating. but every election, regardless of who wins and loses, is a reminder that in our democracy, power rests not with those of us in elected office but with the people we have the privilege to serve. over the last few months, i have had the opportunity to travel around the country and meet people where they live and where they work, from back yards to factory floors. i did some talking, but mostly i did a lot of listening. and yesterday's both confirmed what i have heard from folks all across america. people are frustrated. they are deeply frustrated with the pace of our economic recovery and the opportunities that they hoped for their children and their

grandchildren. they want jobs to come back faster. the one paychecks to go further. and they want the ability to give their children the same chances and opportunities as they had in life. for the men and women who sent us here, they do not expect washington to solve all their problems. but they do expect washington to work for them, not against them. they want to know that their tax dollars are being spent wisely, not wasted. and that we're not going to leave our children a legacy of debt. they want to know that their voices are not being drowned out by a sea of lobbyists and special interests and partisan bickering. they want business to be done here openly and honestly. i ran for this office to tackle these challenges and give voice to the concerns of everyday people. over the last two years, we have made progress. but clearly, too many americans

have not felt the progress yet, and they told us that yesterday. as president, i take responsibility for that. what yesterday also told us is that no one party will be able to dictate where we go from here. that we must find common ground in order to set -- in order to make progress on some fun -- on some uncommonly difficult challenges. i told john boehner last night that i am eager to sit down with both parties to figure out how to move forward together. i am not suggesting this will be easy. i will not pretend that we will be abridged every difference resolve their disagreement. there is the reason we have two parties in this country. both democrats and republicans have certain beliefs and certain principles that each feels cannot be compromised. but what i think the american people are expecting and what we owed them is to focus on those issues that affect their jobs,

their security, and their future, reducing our deficit, promoting a clean energy economy, making sure that our children of the best educated in the world, making sure that we're making investments in technology that will allow us to keep our competitive edge in the global economy. because the most appalling contest we face is not the contest -- the most important contest is not a contest between democrats and republicans. the most important competition we face is between american and our economic competitors around the world. to win that competition is to continue our economic leadership, we will need to be strong and united. none of the challenges we face lend themselves to simple solutions are bumper sticker slogans. nor are the answer is found in any one particular philosophy or ideology. as i have said before, if no person, no party has a monopoly on wisdom. that is why i am eager to hear

good ideas, wherever they come from, whoever proposes them, and that is why i believe it is important to have an honest and civil debate about the choices we face. that is why i want to engage both democrats and republicans in serious conversations about where we're going as an nation. with so much at stake, with the american people do not want from us, especially here in washington, is to spend the next two years refining the political battles of the last two. we just had a tough election. we will have another in 2012. i am not so naive as to think that everybody will put politics aside until then, but i do hope to make progress on the very serious problems facing us right now, and that is going to require all of us, including me, to work harder at building consensus. you know, a little over a month ago, we held a town hall meeting in richmond, virginia,

and one of the most telling questions came from a small- business owner iran's a tree care firm. he told me how hard he works and how busy he was, how does not have time to pay attention to all the back-and-forth in washington, and he asked, is there hope for is returning to civility in our discourse to a halt the legislative process? so as i strapped on the boots again tomorrow, i know that you guys got it under control. it is hard to have faith in that right now, he said. i do believe there is hope for civility. i do believe there is hope for a part -- progress. that is the widely by in their resiliency of the nation that has bounced back for much worse than what we're going through now. a nation that has ever come war and depression, that has been made more perfect in our

structure -- struggle in individual rights and individual freedoms. each time, progress has come slowly and even painfully. but progress has always come. because we have worked at it and because we believe in it. and most of all, because we remember that our first allegiance as citizens is not to party or region or faction but to country. because while we may be proud democrats are proud republicans, we're prouder to be americans. that is something that we all need to remember right now and in the coming months. if we do, i have no doubt that we will continue this nation's long journey towards a better future. with that, let me take some questions. i will start off with ap. >> thank you, mr. president. are you willing to concede at all that what happened last night was not just an expression of frustration about the economy

but a fundamental rejection of your agenda? and given the results, who do you think speaks to the true voice of the american people right now, you or john boehner? >> i think that there's no doubt the people's number one concern is the economy. and what they were expressing great frustration about is the fact that we have not made enough progress on the economy. we have stabilized the economy. we have job growth in the private sectors. but people all across america are not feeling that progress. they do not see it. and then understand and i am the president of the united states and that my core responsibilities making sure that we have an economy that is growing, a middle-class that feels secure, the jobs are being created. so i think i have to take direct responsibility for the fact that we have not made as much

progress as we need to make. moving forward, i think the question is going to be, can democrats and republicans sit down together and come up with a set of ideas that address those core concerns? i am confident that we can. i think there's some areas where it will be very difficult for us to agree on. but i think there'll be a bunch of areas where we can agree. i do not think there's anybody in america and the things that we have an energy policy that works the way it needs to. that things that we should not be working on energy independence, and that gives opportunities for democrats and republicans to come together and think about, whether it is natural gas or energy efficiency, or how we can build electric cars in this country, how we move forward on that agenda. i think everybody in this country things that we have got to make sure that our kids are equipped in terms of their education, their science

background, there mathematics background to compete in this new global economy. that is going to be an area where i think there's potential common ground. so on a whole range of issues, there will be areas where we disagree. i think the overwhelming message that i hear from the voters is that we want everybody to act responsibly in washington. we want you to work harder to arrive at consensus. we want you to focus completely on jobs and the economy and growing at so that we are ensuring a better future for our children and our grandchildren. and i think that there is no doubt that as i reflect on the results of the election, it underscores for me that i have got to do a better job, just like the rebels in washington does. -- just like everybody else in washington does. i think john boehner and in mitch mcconnell and harry reid

and that's a policy are going to have to sit down and work together. because i suspect that if you talk to any individual voter yesterday, they would say that there are some things i agree with democrats on, something side agree with republicans on. i do not think people carry around with them a fixed ideology. i think the majority of people are going about their business, going about their lives. they just want to make sure that we're making progress. that'll be my top priority over the next couple years. savannah. >> following up on what you just talked about. you do not seem to be reflecting are second-guessing any of the policy decisions you have made. instead, send a message the voters were sending was about frustration with the economy or maybe even chalking it up to florida you're on your particular and effectively. if you're not reflecting on your policy agenda, is it possible voters can conclude your stomach

getting it? >> well, then i, that was just the first question. we're going to have a few more here. i am doing a whole lot of reflecting the kulbir is a policy or we're going to of to do a better job. no, i think that over the last two years we have made a series of very tough decisions, but decisions that were right in terms of moving the country forward in an emergency situation, where we had the risk of slipping into a second great depression. but what is absolutely true is that with all that stuff coming at folks fast and furious, a recovery package, what we had to do with respect to the banks, what we had to do with respect to the auto companies, i think people started looking at all this and it felt as if government was getting much

more intrusive into people's lives and then they were accustomed to. now the reason was it was an emergency situation. but i think it is understandable that folks said to themselves, you know, maybe this is the agenda as opposed to response to an emergency. and that is something that i think everybody in the white house understood was a danger. we thought it was necessary. but i am is sympathetic to folks to look at it and said this is looking like a gentle overreach. in addition, there are a bunch of price tax that went with that. so even though these were emergency situations, people rightly said, we already have all this debt, already have these big deficits, this is potentially going to compound it. and at what point are we going to get back to a situation where we are doing when families all around the country do?

which is make sure that if he's been something, you know how to pay for it. as opposed to wrecking of the credit card for the next generation. and i think that the other thing that happened is that, you know, when i won the election in 2008, one of the reasons i think the people were excited about the campaign was the prospect that it would change how business is done in washington. and we were in such a hurry to get things done that we did not change how things got done. and i think that frustrated people. you know, i am a strong believer that the earmarking process in congress is not with the american people really want to see when it comes to making tough decisions about how taxpayer dollars are spent. and i, in a rush to get things done, had to sign a bunch of bills that had the earmarks in

them, which is contrary to what i talked about. and i think folks look at that and said, gosh, this feels like the same partisan squabbling. it seems like the same ways of doing business as happened before. and so one of the things that i have got to take responsibility for is not having moved enough on those fronts. and i think there's an opportunity to move forward on some of those issues. my understanding is eric cantor today said that he wanted to see a moratorium on the earmarks continuing. that is something i think we can work on together. >> is it the notion that voters rejected the policy choice is the maid? >> well, i think that what i think is absolutely true is voters are not satisfied with the outcomes. if right now we have 5%

unemployment instead of 9.6% unemployment, then people would have more confidence in this policy choices. the fact is that for most folks, proof of whether they work are not is -- has the economy gone back to where needs to be? and it has not. my job is to make sure that i am looking at all ideas that are on the table. when it comes to job creation. if republicans have good ideas for job growth that can drive down the unemployment rate and we have not thought of them, we have not looked at them, but we think have a chance of working, we want to try some. so on the policy front, i think the most important thing is to say that we're not going to rule out ideas because there democrat or republican.

we want to just see what works. and ultimately i will be just as president as to the bottom line, results. mike emanuel. >> thank you, mr. president. health care. as you are well aware, obviously a lot of republicans ran against your health care law. some have called for repealing the law. yes a wondering, sir, if you believe that health care reform that you worked so hard on is in danger at this point and whether it if there is a threat as a result of this election? >> well, i know that there are some republican candidates who won last night and feel very strongly about it. i am this will be an issue comes up in discussions with the republican leadership. as i said before though, i think we would be misreading the election if we thought that the american people want to see us for the next two years relitigating arguments that we

had over the last two years. with respect to the health care law generally, and this may go to some of the questions that have been raised already, you know, when i talked to a woman from new hampshire who does not have to mortgage her house because she got cancer and is seeking treatment but now is able to get health insurance, when i talk to parents who are relieved that their child with a pre-existing condition can now stay on their policy until there 26 years old and give them a time to transition to find a job that will give them health insurance, or the small businesses that are now taking advantage of the tax credits provided, then i say to myself that this was the right thing to do. if the republicans have ideas for how to improve our health care system, if they want to

suggest modifications that would deliver faster and more effective reform to a health care system that has been a wildly expensive for too many families and businesses and certainly for our federal government, i am happy to consider some of those ideas i know one of the things that has come up is that the 1099 provision in the health care bill appears to be too burdensome for small businesses. it just involves too much paperwork, too much filing. it is probably counterproductive. it was designed to make sure that revenue was raised to help pay for some of the other provisions. but if it ends up just being so much trouble that small businesses find it difficult to manage, that is something we should look at. so there will be examples right thing we can tweak and make improvements on the progress

that we have made. that is true for any significant piece of legislation. but i do not think that if you ask the american people, should we stop trying to close the doughnut hole that will help senior citizens get prescription drugs? should we go back to a situation where people with pre-existing conditions cannot get health insurance? should we allow insurance companies to drop their coverage when you get sick even though you have been paying premiums? i do not think that you have -- that you would have a strong vote for people say those are provisions are want to eliminate. >> about one out of two voters apparently said that they would like to see health care overturned or repealed. are you concerned about that? >> it also means one of two voters think it was the right thing to do. obviously, this is an issue that has been contentious.

but as i said, i'd think what will be useful is for us to go through the issues that republicans have issues on. not sort of talking generally. but let's talk specifics. this particular provision, when it comes to pre-existing conditions, is it something that you're for or against? helping seniors get the prescription drugs, does that make sense or not? and if we take that approach, which is it different from campaigning. this is now governing. then i think we can continue to make some progress and find some common ground. chip. >> thank you, mr. president. republicans say what this election was about was spending. they say it will be when hell freezes over that they will accept anything remotely like a stimulus bill or any kind of proposals you have to stimulate job growth through spending.

deale accept the fact that any kind of spending to create jobs is dead? and so, what else can government do to create jobs? that is the number-one issue. >> i think it is an important question for democrats and republicans. i think the american people are absolutely concerned about spending and deficits. and i will have of the said commission that is putting forward its ideas. it is a bipartisan group that includes republican and democratic members of congress. hopefully they were able to arrive at consensus on some areas where we can eliminate programs that do not work, cut back on government spending that is inefficient, streamline government, but is not cutting into the core investments that are going to make sure that we are a competitive economy that is growing and providing opportunity for years to come.

so the question i think that my republican friends and me and democratic leaders are going to have to answer is, what are our priorities? what do we care about? and that is going to be a tough debate. because there are some tough choices here. we already had a big deficit that i inherited, and that has been made worse because of the recession. as we bring it down, i want to make sure that we're not cutting into education, that is going to help define whether or not we can compete around the world. i do not think we should be cutting back on research and development. because if we can develop new technologies in areas like clean energy, that could make all the difference in terms of job creation here at home. i think the proposal that i put forward with respect to infrastructure is one that historically we have had

bipartisan agreement about. and we should be about to agree now that it makes no sense for china to have better rail systems than us and singapore have been better airports than us. we just learned that china now has the fastest supercomputer on earth. that used to be us. they're making investments because they know those investments will pay off over the long term. so in these budget discussions, the key is to be able to distinguish between stuff that is not adding to our growth, is not an investment in our future, and those things that are absolutely necessary for us to be able to increase job growth in the future as well. now the single most important thing i think we need to do economically, and this is something that has to be done during the lame-duck session, is making sure that taxes do not go on middle-class families next

year. so we have got some work to do on that front, to make sure that families not only are seeing a higher tax burden, which will automatically happen if congress does not act, but also, making sure that business provisions that we have historically extended each year that, for example, provide tax breaks for companies investing in the united states for research and development, that those are extended. in makes sense for us to extend unemployment insurance. because they're still a lot of folks other hurting. there things we can do right now that will help sustain the recovery and advance it, even as we are also sitting down and figuring out, ok, over the that will not undermine our economy but encourage job growth.

>> you cold it full spending and thus it was dead on arrival. without their support you cannot get any of it through. >> what is true is without any republican support on anything, it will be hard to get things done. i will not anticipate that they're not going to support anything. part of the message to republicans as we want to see stronger job growth in this country. if there are good ideas about putting people to work, that traditionally have garnered republican support, and that do not add to the deficit, my hope is an expectation is that is something we will have a serious conversation about. what it comes to the proposal we put forward to accelerate depreciation for business. if they're building a plant or investing in new equipment, next year, they can take a complete right off next year and get huge

tax break next year, and that would encourage a lot of businesses to get off the sidelines. that is not historically considered a liberal idea. that is an idea that business groups that republicans have supported for long time. the question is going to be delete all come to the table with an open mind and say, what do we think is going to make a difference for the american people? that is how we will be judged. >> thank you, mr. president. after your election when you met with republicans, you said in discussing what policies might go forward, the election had consequences and you pointed out you had one. i wonder what the consequences are -- are there areas you would be willing to compromise on that you might not have been willing to compromise on in the past.

>> well, i think i have been willing to compromise and i will be willing to compromise going forward on a range of issues. let me give you an example. the issue of energy that i mentioned. there were a lot of republicans that ran against the energy bill that passed in the house last year. and so it is doubtful that it can get the votes to pass through the house this year. poindexter, or the year after. -- or next year, or the year after. that does not mean we should not have a better energy policy and let's have those areas where we can agree. we have terrific natural gas resources in this country. we need to develop develop

electric cars, are there things we can do to encourage them? there has been a partisan interest on those issues. there has been discussion about how we can restart our nuclear industry as a means of reducing our dependence on foreign oil and reducing greenhouse gases. is that an area where we can move forward? we were able to increase for the first time in 30 years fuel efficiency standards on cars and trucks. we do not need legislation. we needed the cooperation of legislators and investors and other shareholders. that will move us forward by any serious way. i think when it comes to something like energy, we will have to say, there are areas there -- where there is too much

disagreement. let's not wait awhile let's make some progress on the things we do agree on. we can continue to have a strong and healthy debate about those areas where we do not. >> [inaudible] ." >> i am sure there are remarks about reforming washington that i will be interested in. people want to see more openness. in the midst of the economic crisis, one of the things i take responsibility for is not having pushed harder on some of those issues and i think if you take republicans and democrats at their word, this is an area they want to deliver on. i want to be supportive of that effort. >> thank you. i have a policy question and personal one. you talked about how the

immediate goal is the bush tax cuts and making sure they do not expire. republicans disagree. they want all the bush tax cuts extended. are you willing to compromise? are you willing to negotiate to allow them to expire for everyone over $1 million? where are you going to budge? the second one is, president bush when he went through a similar thing came out and said this was a "thumpin'". when you call you friends, and you see 19 state legislatures go to the other side to my governorships in 20 states, the democratic party's setback, what does it feel like? >> it feels bad.

the toughest thing over the last couple of days is seeing terrific public servants not have the opportunity to serve any more, at least in the short term. you mentioned they are some terrific members of congress who took tough votes because they thought it was the right thing. even though they knew this could cause them political problems. even though a lot of them came from tough swing districts or majority republican districts. the amount of courage that they showed and conviction they showed is something that i admire so much and i cannot overstate it. there is not only sadness about seeing them go, but there is also a lot of questioning on my

part in terms of what could i have done something differently or more so those folks would still be here? it is hard. i take responsibility for it in a lot of ways. i will tell you they have been incredibly gracious when i have conversations with them and what they have told me is, we do not have regrets because i feel like we were doing the right thing and they may be saying that to make me feel better which shows their character and their class. they are terrific public servants. my goal is to make sure that we do not have a huge spike in taxes for middle-class families.

, -- not only would that be a burden on families who are going through tough times, it is bad for the economy. it is very important that we are not taking a bunch of money out of the system from people who are most likely to spend that money on goods, services, groceries, buying a new winter coat. that is why unemployment insurance is important. it is the right thing to do. my goal is to sit down with speaker elect boehner and see

where we can can move forward in a way that does no harm. that extends those tax cuts that are -- that extends the provisions that encourages businesses to invest. and how that negotiation works itself out. it is too early to say. this is one of my top priority is and my hope is that given we all have an interest in growing the economy and encouraging job growth, we're not going to play brinksmanship but we will act responsibly. >> thank you, mr. president. you said earlier it was clear that congress is rejecting the idea of cap and trade and looking ahead, do you feel the

same way about epa regulating carbon emissions? is that off the table? to follow up on what you said, you said you did not do enough to change the way things were handled in the city. in order to get your health care bill passed, do you wish you had not made those deals even if it meant the collapse of the program? >> i think that to making sure that families had security and we were on a trajectory to lower health-care costs was absolutely critical for this country. you're right that when you are navigating through the house and senate in this environment, it is an ugly mess when it comes to process. that is how people view the

outcome. that is something that i regret. we could not have made the process more health care than it ended up being. the outcome was a good one. with respect to the epa. the smartest thing for us to do is to see if we can get democrats and republicans are room where we are serious about energy independence and keeping the air clean and the water clean and dealing with the issue of greenhouse gases and seeing if there are ways we can make progress in the short term and invest in technology that starts giving us the tools to reduce greenhouse gases and solve this problem.

the epa is under a court order that says greenhouse gases are pollutant. that fall under their jurisdiction. one of the things that is important for me is to have us ignore the science and define ways that we can solve these problems, that do not hurt the economy, that encourage the development of clean energy. that may give us opportunities to create new industries and create jobs and that put us in a competitive posture around the world. it is too early to say whether or not we can make some progress on that front. i think we can. capt. trade was one way of skinning the cat. it was a means, not an end. we will be looking for other means to address this problem.

epa wants help from the legislature. i do not think that the desire is to somehow be protective of their powers here. what they want to do is make sure the issue is being dealt with. >> thank you, mr. president. on personal, you had fun on the campaign trail by saying the republicans were drinking a slippery and sitting on the side while you were trying to pull the car out of the ditch. now that there are 60 house districts that seem to have rejected that message, is that possible that there are a majority of americans who think your policies were taking us in reverse? what specific changes will you make to your approach to fix that and better connect with the american people? don't ask don't tell us something you promised to end. we have 60 votes and 59 votes in

the senate, it is a tough issue. do have to tell your liberal base that maybe 52 or 53 votes in the senate, you're not going to get it done in the next two years? >> omi take the second issue first. i have been a strong believer in the notion that if someone is willing to serve in our military in uniform, putting their lives on the line for security, that they should not be prevented from doing so because of their sexual orientation. since there has been a lot of discussion about polls over the last 48 hours, it is worth noting that the overwhelming majority of americans feel the same way. it is the right thing to do. as commander-in-chief, i have said that making this change needs to be done in an orderly fashion and i've worked with the pentagon and worked with secretary gates and admiral

mullen to make sure we are looking at this in a systematic way that maintains order and discipline. we need to change those policies. there is a rare -- a review that comes out. we will have surveyed attitudes and opinions within the armed forces. i will expect that the secretary of defense gates and chairman of the joint chiefs of staff admiral mullen will have something to say about the review. i will look at it carefully. that will give us time to act and potentially during the lame- duck session to change this policy. we have a bunch of court cases out there as well. something that would be disruptive to good order and discipline and unit cohesion is if we have got this issue bouncing around in the courts as it already has during the last several weeks, where the

pentagon and the chain of command does not know any given time what rules they're working on. we need to provide certainty and it is time for us to move this policy forward, and this should not be a partisan issue. this is an issue as i said where you have a sizable portion of the american people squarely behind the notion that folks were willing to -- who were willing to serve should be treated fairly and equally. in terms of how we move forward, i think that the american people understand that we are still digging our way out of a pretty big mess. i do not think anyone denies they think we're in a ditch. i do not think we have gone out yet. to move the analogy for that i used in the campaign, what they want is democrats and

republicans are pushing some more to get this off the ground and we have not done that. if you think i was engaging in too much campaign rhetoric thinking -- saying republicans were sitting on the side of the road watching as get that part of the ditch, at the least, we were pushing in opposite directions. >> you reject that idea altogether, your policies could be going against -- >> yes. here's the bottom line. when i came into office, this economy was in a freefall. the economy has stabilized. the economy is growing. i think it would be hard to argue we're going backwards. we can argue is we're stuck in neutral. we are not moving the way we

need to to make sure that folks have the jobs and opportunity, they're seeing economic growth in their communities the way they need to. that will require democrats and republicans to come together and look for the best ideas to move things forward. it will not be easy. not just because democrats and republicans may have different priorities as we were discussing when it came to how we structure tax cuts, but because these issues are hard. the republicans throughout the campaign said they are concerned about deficits. one of the most important things we can do is economic growth. what other proposals do they have to grow the economy? if they're rejecting some of the proposals i made, i want to hear

from them. what affirmative policies can make a difference in terms of encouraging job growth and promoting the economy? because i do not think tax cuts alone are going to be a recipe for the kind of expansion we need. we cut taxes significantly and we did not see the kind of expansion that will be necessary in terms of driving the unemployment rate down significantly. i think what we will need to do is for us to mix and match ideas and figure out those ideas were we can agree and move forward and disagree without being disagreeable on those areas that we cannot agree on. if we accomplish that, there will be time for politics later. we can solidify this recovery.

>> thank you. .> the slurpee summit >> do you think you need to hit the reset button? how do you plan to set that? would you include anything beyond your cleveland speech, those proposals to get them off the sidelines and get them off and start hiring again? >> i think this is an important question we have been asking ourselves for several months. you are right, as i reflect on what has happened, one of the things i think that has not been managed by me as well as it needed to be was finding the

right balance in making sure that businesses had rules of the road and are treating customers fairly, whether it is credit cards or insurance for their mortgages. also making absolutely clear that the only way america succeeds is if businesses are succeeding. the reason we have got we have an unparalleled standard of living is because we have a free market that is dynamic and entrepreneurial. and that free market has to be nurtured and cultivated. there is no doubt that when you had the financial crisis on wall street, the battle around

health-care, around financial reform and you had bp, you had a successive set of issues in which business took the message that it seems like we may be always painted as the bad guy. i have to take responsibility in terms of making sure that i made clear to the business community and the country the most important thing we can do is to boost and encourage our business sector and make sure they are hiring. we have specific plans in terms of how we can structure that outrage. keep in mind we have been talking to ceo's constantly and as a planned for my trip later this week to asia, the focus is how are we going to open up markets so businesses can

prosper and we can sell more goods and create more jobs here in the u.s. and a whole bunch of corporate executives that will be joining us. so i can help them open up those markets and allow them to sell their products. there has been a lot of strong interaction behind the scenes. setting the right tone publicly will be important in and of making a difference at the margins in terms of how businesses make investment decisions. >> [inaudible] >> i discussed some with chip we have -- it was doubtful they would get a hearing. we are [unintelligible] make more investments that

create more jobs here in the u.s. and listening hard to them in the context where democrats and republicans are together. we are receiving the same message at the same time and acting on that agenda could make a difference. >> thank you, mr. president. how do you respond to those who say the election outcome was voters saying they see u.s. out of touch with their personal economic pain and are you willing to make changes in your leadership style? >> you know, there is an inherent danger in being in the white house and being in the bubble.

folks did not have any complaints about my leadership style when i was running around iowa. for a year and got a pretty good look at me up close and personal. they were able to lift the hood and kick the tires and i think they understood my story was theirs. i might have a funny name, i might have lived in different places. the values of hard work and responsibility and honesty and looking out for one another that have been instilled in them by their parents, those were the same values i took from my mom and grandparents. and so, the track record has been that when i am out of this place, that is not an issue. when you're in this place, it is

hard not to seem removed and one of the challenges that we have to think about is how do i meet my responsibilities here in the white house which require a lot of hours and a lot of work but still have that opportunity to engage with the american people on a day-to-day basis. and give them confidence i am listening to them. those letters that i read every night, some of them break my heart. provide meof them encouragement and inspiration. no one is filming me read those letters. it is hard for people to get a sense of, how is he taking in all this information? there are more things that we

can do to make sure that i am getting out of here. i think it is important to point out as well that a couple of great communicators, ronald reagan and bill clinton were standing at this podium two years into their presidency getting very similar questions. because the economy was not working the way it needed to be and there were a range of factors that made people concerned that maybe the party in power was not listening to them. this is something i think every president needs to go through. because the responsibilities of this office are so enormous and so many people are depending on what we do and in the rush of activity, sometimes with this

tracks -- we lose track of the ways we connected with folks that got us here in the first place. that is something that -- i'm not recommending for every future president that they took a shellacking like it did last night. i am sure there are easier ways to learn these lessons. i do think that this is a growth process. and an evolution. and the relationship i have had with the american people is one that builds slowly, peaked at this incredible high and during the course of the last few years, as we have together gone through some very difficult times, has gone rockier and

tougher. i am sure it has more of sundowns during the course of me being in this office. -- more ups and downs during the course of my being in this office. getting out of here is good for me, too. when i travel around the country, even in the toughest of these debates, during the summer when there were protesters about when i am meeting families who have lost loved ones in afghanistan or iraq, i always come away from those interactions feeling so much more optimistic about this country. we have such good and decent people who on a day-to-day basis are finding all kinds of ways to live together and educate kids and grow their communities and

improve their communities and create businesses and work together to create great new products and services. the american people always make me optimistic and that is why during the course of the last two years, as tough it is has been -- as it has been, sometimes scary moments we have gone through, i have never doubted that we will emerge stronger than we were before and i think that remains true and i'm going to be looking forward to playing my part in helping that journey along. thank you very much, everybody. >> there are three governor's races that are too close to call. there in illinois, minnesota,

and oregon. regarding the minnesota governor's race, the democrat leads by 9000 votes. the difference of less than half a percentage point is in the balance of the automatic recount, all the figures could shift as state and local officials reconcile their tallies. the current minnesota governor, tim pawlenty, possible republican presidential candidate, will stay in his post as long as it takes to certify winner. -- certify a winner. >> landmark supreme court cases on c-span radio. >> there is nothing voluntary about the rug -- bible reading. >> in part two, mr. schempp felt students should not be required

to read from the bible before class. nationwide on xm 132 and on c- span.org. goldberg discusses the election results, the conservative movement, and the list -- next wave of leaders on the right. sunday at noon eastern on "book tv". >> it is the day after the midterm elections where democrats have lost control of the u.s. house but still have a majority in the senate. the national journal reporters recast the election results.

>> jason is responsible for the coverage to get every day and the issues you receive as a subscriber. i will turn it over to jason and his distinguished panel. >> thank you for coming to a policy discussion so early in the morning. we are going to focus on policy today. we will have plenty to discuss and will be able to get to that. the want to turn specifically to some of the top issues that the next congress will find itself facing. i want to introduce our panel. directly to my right is representative [unintelligible] he has been around town for a

long time. he had a frenzied table as a blue dog and member of energy in congress. he is retiring at the end of this congress. voluntarily. [laughter] next on isador norm coleman, chief executive officer of the action network. his term ran from 2002-2008. he was mayor of st. paul. when he was in the senate, he was chairman of the senate subcommittee. he will talk about the investigations the next congress might conduct. next is representative jim nussle of iowa. he was chairman of the budget

committee and after that, he was president george w. bush's omb director. he is a budget cri guy. finally, rep. brian baird, who chairs several subcommittees. he spent the better part of his career focusing on issues that are extremely technical, especially the environment but also foreign policy and taxes. is familiar with toughen vermins. he also is retiring voluntarily. he is a psychologist which must have come in very handy for public service. let's go into it. representative gordon, health care. in exit polls throughout the campaign, we saw some attention focused on health care.

you had a front-row seat as member of the house energy and congress committee. the speaker in waiting john boehner and the likely next majority leader came out of the gate last night and said we will repeal the health care law. that was just signed into law in march. they're saying we're not going to let you down to members of the tea party and people who were fired about this. with the democratic senate and a president who considers this a signature domestic policy achievement, what are we in line for? >> i was a little drowsy this morning and i looked at your socks and it helped to wake me up. i am ready to go. healthcare is my personal issue and everyone is an expert in it.

they look at their own field. what you will see is -- there will be a vote to repeal and carry out that promise. i would suspect it will carry in the house but then it will not get by the senate or if it did, somehow, by a filibuster, you will see the president veto it. the next cut at it will come at popular bits that would undermine it. doing away with the cadillac tax and the mandatory requirement. you will see that it will pass. they have money somewhere they will use for that. you will see that it stopped in the senate. you will see an effort to cut

off funding for hhs or some agency for implementing some of the rules. it will give republicans a good forum to do what they said in terms of their roots, but you will really not see much action on the other end of it which could protect them also from not having to see dire consequences there. >> as a member of the senate, you were in the majority and minority. you were on a moderate path and you were in the middle of this big filibuster's such as drilling in anwr. where do you see this playing out in the senate? >> i have to make an observation about the politics. there is the intensity and enormity of what yesterday. it is the heart of democratic

territory. he never had to campaign in minnesota. they usually miss that wave. minnesota republicans took control -- in my 36 years in minnesota, minnesotans never controlled both houses, they do today. a huge -- so that this last night, setting the stage. if you look at the polling before hand and we have and those who are elected have. health-care played a big part in this election. the intensity of those who work opposed to health care was 44%

of likely voters as opposed to 24%. among those most likely to vote, those who showed up who are angry in many cases, you saw the huge swings in the house, health care was a driving force. i think you have to do with speaker better did which was tell people we heard and listened and we will repeal obama care. in the senate -- the senate, the ship of that is forming. i see mitch mcconnell, he is roman -- holding on to these forces and he has a guy next to him with wheels trying to cut out his wheels. i think there are symbolic statements that have to take place. i think the action in the senate is not going to be as clear and not going to be as divisive

because of the nature of the senate. if you look to the next cycle where you have 23 democrats, they have to be looking at what happened last night. i would think that even though democrats are in control of the senate, there is -- there are a number of folks in montana and virginia and other places, they will have to have greater and more conversations than they have before. those conversations, they went on to a certain degree. a lesson in the last two years. you get financial reform. you will see more conversations going on because of the political reality of what happened last night is folks looking to the future of 2012. >> we were discussing and touching upon the budget and the appropriations process, the one area that health care can be

attacked or the health care what can be defunded. if things bond down in the senate on a straight repeal, is that a viable option for -- billick >> that is one scenario. i think if you grew up with there arese rock", some facts about health care that come into play if you are 6 years old or in congress for the first time. there are three seasons and overriding issues. fiscal, everything will be based on monday. we do not have it in washington.

money will be an undergirding, overriding backdrop. there is an anti-washington politics that is bigger than right now -- that republicans or democrats. because of what it did in driving independent voters. there is the start of the presidential race which will start earlier this cycle than ever before because if you remember the last opportunity here was in president clinton's situation, bob dole that point was the presumptive -- he had a pretty good lead. there was a good presumption and there is none now. this is wide open. after last night, if you are thinking about this, you would put the afterburners on. you have a lame duck session

where everything needs to still be accomplished. there is no budget, there is no taxes from 2009 alone the extenders from 2010 or the expiring provisions from 2001 and 2003. you have 24 legislative days to figure this out. that is number one. second season is the first 100 some days which is the budget cycle again where fiscal issues, the state of the union, how they are beginning to work together is going to be paramount. you have a debt boat. -- vote. when it comes up again, if you listen to treasury it is one thing or cbo or omb, it is another. you will have a debt vote where everything will, a. you have republicans who are not going to want to vote for debt

and democrats you could argue based on what they have seen are not willing to help. and properly so. how you mention that is going to be very interesting. those are the seasons and those are the issues and everything will tie and bounce off of those three things in my judgment. >> i wanted to follow-up on that. this is the debt limit boat, it is looming out there. for as much attention as we paid too tax cuts, there is a little bit of wiggle room and people do not want to hear that in terms of getting and sending an extension before people have to file tax returns. the debt limit if we do not extend or raise the debt limit, -- the results could be catastrophic. there is potential that this becomes a huge soul-searching moment for an newly emboldened

party. >> in 1995, the boat was the continuing resolution would shut down the government. that was in october, after debate, discussion, machinations, all that sort of thing. this will be precipitated on the sealing itself and it will be a very technical ceiling. you have republicans coming in not wanting one of their first votes to extend the debt limit and you have republicans who are not going to be willing to help them unless they get their seat at the table. you have a very difficult negotiation that is coming up and it may be one of the most important junctures of the next two years. like i said, i see it coming probably after the lame duck and after the first 100 days of lots

of chest beating and smoke and maybe a little bit of fire as a result. going to be a very difficult testing period for both parties in washington. >> if you were returning to your district and health care was coming up as an issue, how would you be explaining this to -- how would you be maneuvering as a member of a new minority, as a more liberal minority? how would you take that tack and have those conversations? >> i think we made a lot of mistakes in the health care approach. our intentions were good to help

people with no insurance and tried to end recission and lower the cost of health care. the thing we have not mentioned that will be the biggest challenge for the new majority is entitlements. you hear these people running for congress saying i will cut waste, fraud, and abuse and that will balance the budget. the deficit exceeds all discretionary spending combined. if you shut down the military, open the presence, you are still in deficit. you have to do with entitlements and the problem gets worse and it will be interesting to see some of these folks came in with facile promises dealing with medicare and medicaid when the present value of the debt or the long- term deficit is $52 trillion. that exceeds the net worth of the american people combined. it is not simple but you have to grow the economy and cut spending, including entitlements and you will have to increase

revenue. they're not going to want to cut entitlements because people will get angry and they are pledging not to increase revenue. there will be in a box and it will be tough to deal with. >> that is a nice segue into questions on the deficit. we have a presidential commission addressing the deficit and the dead whose recommendations are due december 1. democratic leaders pledged earlier to take up and their recommendation that were forwarded. 14 add of 18 of the members to sign off on what these recommendations are. do you see one or any of those recommendations been forwarded, and you see any action taking place? >> one of the most disturbing things about the campaign season was people on the left and right before the commission's issued its report pledging to block it. people were saying we will not touch entitlements and on the right, there were single will not raise revenue.

the point was to come up with some new ideas. people on both sides say we cannot get there without doing both and people on both sides who ran for office have said we will block one or the other. if they do that, they will miss an opportunity. if they showed courage on both sides, we might get this entitlement spending and the long-term debt problem under control. if we do not we will have passed more debt to our kids. >> i was hopeful we would have this window of sanity in the lame duck to do something like that, particularly with social security. it is a recipe. everyone knows what you have to do. to put it together. i'm afraid there was too much hard talk during the campaign. i was also hoping that as the tax cuts came about, there would be a compromise reached the their which then could flow over

into social security and other areas. i do not think you will see -- there were too many previous card statements made in the leadership like to see some of these things get done. they will have some troops that will not. i think that some of the democrats will say you wanted, it is yours, you take care of it. i am not optimistic we will get anything done. >> the comment about the long- term issues, there is no question that underlies. i would hate to get caught up in that unsolvable perhaps right now but not unsolvable if you start moving in the right direction. what last night was about was kind of stopping the bleeding. they saw the stimulus package that did not do was was promised and keep employment under a%.

they saw that as wasteful. there is less appetite for more stimulus to growing economies. if you look at health care, there are pieces of it. i'm hoping you can see some bipartisan action. the 1099 issue. small businesses being hit with costs. everyone knows that is absurd. i am thinking you can find some ways to get some bipartisan action that will move us in the direction of stopping the bleeding, slowing the spending, one of the frustrations from a republican perspective, you look at the issue of what happened to student loans. i have two kids in college so it is important to me. i am borrowing at 7% and there is a 4% spread somewhere. that money is not going to

deficit reduction, it went to health care. there is a philosophical concern about we can generate new revenue but will it go to new programs? when we cut spending, those savings going to cutting the deficit, not something else. i think we are moving in the right direction and there are long-term problems out there. for many of us, last night was stopping the movement to slide in the wrong direction with an opportunity to move in a more positive direction but we have a long way to go. >> tarp happened under george bush's watch to a crisis that happened under his watch. if we had not done tarbes, we would have seen global economic collapse. every economist would say it would have been catastrophic collapse.

we have got the stimulus. i agree the stimulus was not crafted will but the vast portion of it went to tax cuts that did not generate jobs or infrastructure. we advocated for more infrastructure but have we not -- had we not done a stimulus, the unemployment level would have gone higher. today the deficit entirely on the stimulus and the other thing is not going to solve the intent -- the entitlement problem. it played well politically but you have that entitlement problem with seniors demanding more and demanding less taxes, i do not think you get there. >> i think tarp and the stimulus demonstrates people do not appreciate what you stop them from not having to. that was the problem there. we can talk about it all day. >> i voted for tarp. saxby chambliss -- it was

bipartisan. i have no doubt it was the right vote. he lost 100,000 votes voting for tar. there was a difference between tarpon stimulus. no one is laying the deficit -- the difference between the two was truck was clearly bipartisan. we sat there, both sides, both candidates. mccain and obama's said we had to do this and economists came in, bernanke came in. we had to do that. stimulus was different. it was partisan. from the beginning, you had some folks saying we do not think this will work and the other side said it is, trust us. you have to distinguish between tarp and stimulus. >> i agree. >> for us here saying that is an

example where we put out a lot of government money and it does not -- did not do what it was promised. it is not the cause of all the problems. there is no doubt that you are not going to see big stimulus programs coming out of this congress. >> is there a lesson there given the stimulus had over $200 billion of tax cuts, if you are saying the stimulus did not work, but it had $200 billion in tax cuts, is the solution for the tax cuts? >> the stimulus did two things. if you pour a lot of money into something you have some impact. i am not saying -- you pour a lot of money into things that did not have impact. the show already jobs and all of a sudden they do not exist. there is benefit to stimulus but it is a cost-benefit analysis. >> we were supposed to talk

about next year as a of this year. >> i was listening to -- i agree on this issue of entitlements and the long term. i believe that the window on the deficit commission will probably not be opened. usually in the past -- i have tried to pass partisan budget reform and i tried my own personal budget, it does not work very well. it is not a very sexy, glamorous issue. everyone sees their committee jurisdiction involved. it is ridiculous. when we reform the budget process, it happened in 1974 and 1990 and 1998. it usually happens quietly, behind the scenes. usually happens after a very complicated negotiation over 10,000 other things that say let's take this advantage now

and reform the budget process. that is when it will happen. it cucould come on the debt bil. part of the omnibus appropriations bill. you will not see budget reform come into the wide open because i do not see people getting into it. if you listen to both the republicans and democrats, they are providing room to negotiate. even though you do not hear. you have to raise revenue. that does not necessarily mean you have to raise taxes. i will explain. tax reform, loophole closing, growth in the economy. you grow the economy, it is an amazing x factor for bringing in revenue. there is a wiggle room. the same is true for entitlements. it is difficult to change the

entitlements. except if you do not make it effective today. if you say we will make that change may be 10, 15 years from now. if we see progress on both the deficit issue from a revenue increasing standpoint to growth in the economy and we see in thailand progress because you are phasing in possibly a new system that everyone understands and it does not seem to be unfair to the current fox to depend on it, you may have some wiggle room for the parties to come together. i am hopeful this is still possible. i do not think you are going to see it out in the bright lights of the floor of the house and senate because it typically does not happen there. when it happens -- if you look at it historically.

>> gives bigger to beat john boehner moves forward with some of those reforms, he actually might be able to bring some of this into control. >> this gets that one of the underlying tensions that john boehner might face, which is that he is an institution list. he has been around for 20 years. he really knows how