american history. it is all available for you on television, radio, on line, and social media networking sites. we take c-span on the road with our digital bus, mobile content vehicles, bringing our resources to your community. it is washington your way, the c-span network. now available in over 100 million homes. provided by cable, as a public service. >> welcome to "newsmakers." mr. walden, thank you for being with us.

>> i am curious, you have this huge crop of incoming freshmen who have just campaigned on shrinking government and getting away from the typical washington power game. now your job in the next couple of weeks and is to try to make some transitions to make this all goes smoothly. i am wondering how you balance those two things, of ensuring a smooth transition but not appearing to try to coopt an outsider's style of a group that is coming in. >> we are not in any measure trying to call up, we are trying to harness their energy and put it to good use because they represent the energy that american voters expressed on election day. i was out there helping them get

elected, so we know these people pretty well. we helped them get elected because we wanted to change washington and put americans back in charge. part of what i am doing as chairman of the gop transition team is we have involved the incoming freshmen on our committee, and we are looking at how you can modernize congress, how you can reform congress, make it more transparent and accountable. so that the public can trends -- participate in that business, and so can legislators. in pass congress it really hit the scene at where these huge bills were shut down and you had barely time to get them printed, let alone read them. rank-and-file members of both parties really get tired of it. we are under john banners initiative. that is our primary charge to

work on during this transition time. >> every speaker incoming in the past two decades has come in with the reform agenda and bows to make the house more open. always runs into the reality of needing to find coalition. why will this be any different? >> because if we don't do it, if we don't keep our word, if we don't implement the pledge, we will get the next shellacking. we are headed into negative territory if we don't change. boehner is going to have to open it up and make it more transparent and accountable so

we can get on with the mission of implementing the plans of getting people back to work tuesday night's when you park the partisan weaponry at the door, wednesday you start to work on solving the problems. it is not always easy to do. these are big challenges we face. when he was chair of the education and work force committee, he ran an open process. he would have his bills come to the floor under very oakum circumstances be very open circumstances and fight it out on the floor. it said the historical mark for how not to legislate. it had never been done in house in modern history. >> talking about changes, you

are already hard at work in trying to get this transition going i know you are looking for areas of savings. you talked frequently about your small business background and how everything is on the table. what does greg walden think should be done? ready personally see areas that you could save money and congress could save money? >> there are a lot of them. i got my transition notebook around here somewhere. the first thing we do is give the power point presentation. as a small-business owner, that alone is more expensive than copying them in black and white. we went out and down 99 cents notebooks. there are ways to run this war

affordably if you just are with that principle that every dollar of matters -- the there are ways to run this more affordably. the broad scope is that for example, legislation today has to be converted three different times in three different formats before the rules committee can print it out. who would put up with that in their own business? i think there are things we can change. there are things to open up the process. my degree is in journalism from the university of oregon. i was in the radio business for 22 years. the rules committee has been wired for cameras for couple of years, but they were not allowed to be installed. david pryor will be our rules committee chairman. i have applauded him for this. he has asked the architect to go ahead and get the cameras in there. there are things we can do to open up the process and cut the costs.

the questionnaire should be out by tomorrow or monday that to every schedule, office manager, and chief of staff, who asked them how we can improve -- improve the way they function in their job. we could save so much money and gain so much efficiency, if you just had a set term in advance when the house would rise and members could go back to their districts, we would not all have our staff crawling around -- kremlin around trying to figure out which like to be on -- scrambling all around. there are things you can do to bring some certainty do the -- to the legislative floor schedule and not have them interrupted by votes on the floor, to improve the ability to schedule, and that will bring efficiency and cut costs. it is the public's business, the

public's money. we are entrusted with it. it is time to get it right. >> just to go back to the savings, very briefly. cutting employees in the capital -- are you willing to cut the work force in the capital? >> absolutely. let me give you an example. i asked jim nessle to come in. i asked him what we should and should not do. what would you recommend? one of the things he said, they sent pink slips to every single person on the hill. he said he got a call from the library of congress saying i got your pink slip, but i am actually appointed by the president, so you don't actually have the authority to fire me. we need to be thoughtful about it and realize our limitations.

they also sat down with the doorkeeper at the time and said what you do all they, because we do not know. they never could get a straight answer. they eliminated the position, and nobody noticed. i go back to the rise of business principles. -- i go back to my small business principles. i look at in terms of how to gain efficiency, how you cut costs by managing it better? by asking the people who manage the day-to-day how they think we can manage better. that should be our goal, not some arbitrarily throwing a number at a dart board. i have never operated at it -- my business that way and i don't think we should do that in congress. some of it may actually require investment in capital. and our business, not long after we bought it, i discovered where releasing old phones. i could get cost recovery in

about two years ago bought a phone system and i would not have to pay the phone company more to rent it. there are things we can look at at rates of return where some investment up front achieve permanent long-term savings down the road. i am just going to bring business principles. our team is excited about that opportunity. >> you mention scheduling changes and how that can have a cost effect for members of congress and leaders and rank- and-file. we have heard reports about possibly having three weeks on, one week off, alternating weeks. do you personally have a preference or -- for how this should work? if you could talk about whether the transition team has discussed that in any detail, and what you think should happen. >> we have a terrific presentation from the soon to be majority leader, eric

cantor's staff. they have looked every alternative. they have done studies on what works and what has not. they were able to lay out historically what has happened and then some alternatives. what i have tried to do is create a transition team environment where we can bounce all kinds of ideas and not have somebody do shoot them down. in this business, when an idea leaks out and somebody runs with it, somebody shoots it. i am trying to maintain that business attitude of let's throw everything out there. some of them sound crazy, but that may lead to something better. know of a rank-and-file member who is satisfied with the existing house scheduled in terms of personal quality of life, but just how absurd it operates. one of our principles has to be to get certainty. let's improve the operation of the house so you get certainty

in the hearings. it is absolutely rude and nearly reprehensible that we invite very talented people to testify before committees and let them sit there for a couple of hours while we give opening statements. they are just political posturing statements, and then we get called away from votes on the floor of the house, and they are still sitting there are two or three hours later. that structure this so you get the input you want and make a hearing process valuable for everyone. the third thing is a director nhtsa we stay in touch with the american people. -- structuring it so we stay in touch with the american people. we want to make sure there is quality time to go home to your district and work with the people in your district who sent you to washington. make sure you are still in touch and you have not stray from what they want. every district is different, but every member needs to stay in touch with the voters.

is there process. those are the principles we are working at. there is the overarching nature of can we get efficiency, cut costs, and improve access. the whole reason for this is, can we get better policy output? kelly keep focused on ways to reduce waste in spending and move forward on our initiatives that really matter to americans. >> if we could term ralph -- briefly to committee chairmanships. the electorate said they did not like career politicians. in your house republican rules, there are term limits for chairmanship's, but there is a mechanism by which they can be circumvented. do you believe the republican leadership should issue waivers, and why or why not?

>> i don't want to prejudge what the conference is going to do. i am trying to be really careful about prejudging what the transition team is going to come forward with before we have had all the listening sessions with the members and invited in the other side of the aisle to help us with their ideas as well. i am trying to stay out of making firm statements and some of these regards. personally, we have a six-year term limits for committee chairs. it would take a change in the conference rules to alter that. does being a ranking member have the same guy is being the chairman of the committee? that is about discussion we should have moving forward. everybody knew what they were when we got to this point, six years. i would be surprised if the

conference votes to change those rules. >> by virtue of having been here so long and sing a few transitions in congress, it seems that what goes around comes around. every frustrated minority leads to a time in the next majority when there are then somewhat recriminations and rules changes. what is your philosophy about respecting the rights of the minority, knowing that someday you might be in it. >> jim gave us a couple of really good points. one is, sweat the small stuff. at the end of the day, that is what matters most. we now on the operation of the house and are responsible for it. we will be held accountable for it. how the house functions is our responsibility. it is like taking over business. you are now in charge. you get the good and bad, so you better get it right.

the little things are what will bite you. the second thing is, he told a story about how he fought as the republican majority transition leader to make sure that the minority member of the budget committee had adequate office space and staff space. that was john spratt at the time. he had to fight republicans because he said we had been in the wilderness for years, why would we be kind to these people were not kind to us? ironically, that office space he fought and fought for the then minority is now the office that paul ryan has today. the principle we all learned in sunday school, but treat each other the way you want to be repeatetreated.

these petty little things that both parties engage in at times diminishes our ability to focus on what matters most. that is solid these problems. we are not going to also agree on everything, but let's have a process where you have the opportunity to put your ideas on the table in committee and have them considered in a thoughtful way, and not get into recriminations. we spend too much time on that and it degrades the institution in the eyes of the public and diminishes our authority to legislate effectively and thoughtfully. the country has never needed a different focus more than it does today. we have this rare opportunity to get it right. we need to do the right thing for the institution of congress. if we are really successful, we will begin to see those negative numbers turn around and restore the faith of the american people. >> since you bring up potential

compromises on the big issues, you have been focused on the transition and the operation of the house itself. one of the big policy issues that will come up next week is tax cuts. republicans have made it clear, you have talked extensively on the campaign trail about wanting to extend all of the bush-era tax cuts. we have seen in the recent few days president obama and his advisor seeming to open the door a little bit to an agreement that would let you do that. i wonder what kind of room you think there is in the next week or two for compromise, and what you think that would look like. >> one of the reasons we ended up out of power in 2006 is because we did not do what we said we would do. i think clearly the pledge to america, the document that was developed in concert with america, listening to americans. we said we would support extension of the current tax cuts, because we think it will

bring stability to the economy grow ande investors to again produce jobs. i understand how this operates. i have had to sign payroll checks and i know how to create jobs. certainty is a clear point in that. whatever the decisions are, they should be predicated on whether the decision will help create jobs or will it cost jobs? does it add certainty in the workplace or does it not? we are going to keep our word. this is what we ran on. in an unprecedented -- american said we are with you, we don't want this other direction. it reminds me of the jimmy carter days, the mixed messaging coming out. great uncertainty, which gives great consternation to the democrats. you get one message from mr. axelrod and then the president

halfway around the world has to issue a clarification. they seem to be negotiating with themselves, in public, with the press. we stand by what we said we would stand by. i think you'll see resilience force. we are not in charge until january. >> does that mean no compromise on the length of time of setting income-tax rates? if there were a deal to be had were the wealthiest taxpayers would get their tax cuts extended, which the white house has been unwilling to consider. >> i think you have seen strong statements from our leaders, eric cantor and john painter, that they don't support decoupling. the focus of and is on the wealthy. the real issue here is how it will affect small business

income. that is part of it, but not all of it. you also have a problem with getting capital in the marketplace, money into businesses. this is where a lot of the money is. there is so much uncertainty. we know we have big budget issues ahead of us. beyond all that, it is what we said we would do a week or two after the election. we will not go back on a principal and pledged that we gave to america. i cannot imagine backtracking on that. >> you run the energy and commerce committee where there is a tough battle for the chairmanship. you have signaled, or people have signaled that you might be interested in it subcommittee chair at the telecommunications subcommittee. is that something you are interested in? >> let me back a couple of steps. i stepped off the energy and commerce committee earlier this year and i hope to get back on.

that will be a decision by the steering committee, but i think i will get back on it. i spent 22 years in the broadcast business. i was the ranking republican on oversight investigations subcommittee and i really enjoyed that work. the energy and commerce committee is a terrific committee with incredible jurisdiction. i am one of the few members from the northwest on it. there is not a bad subcommittee there. i know i will have some other responsibilities to attend to. we have to sort of all-out and see the chairman is. the steering committee will be making those decisions and whether or not there is a waiver on the six-year term limits. i don't know, and i am kind of dodging you on that one for now. >> you just mentioned briefly the other responsibilities. what might those be in republican leadership? >> i was not anticipating being

named gop transition chairman, so i don't know what the leadership may have in mind. i think -- i have been at the leadership table for about a year and a half and have really enjoyed the work. i think i accomplished the tax -- the tasks that were given to me in a successful way, and i look forward to staying involved at the leadership table. i hope to stay on as the chairman of the gop leadership, but that decision will be made by the speaker to be, john boehner. the real issue is i had better perform well as the transition team chairman if i expect to continue on trying to do that work for him. >> can you talk about the spending cuts that republicans hope to impose? you talked about $100 billion in spending or more. that is a big number. if history is any guide, efforts

like that can sometimes turn into a showdown with the white house over shutting down the government. are republicans willing to have that fight and take that action, and duke voters want to see that? -- do voters want to see that? >> it is sort of like going to demolition derby. everyone has to stand to see that. we are not into that. the congress underwrote parties has not done adequate oversight over a government that continues to expand at an enormous rate. we talked about how many employees we should have in the capital. what can we afford, given our revenues? what a really need to be doing? our position is to roll back to the 2008 levels and start their. i want to make it really clear. there is not an agency in the federal government that is not deserving of oversight.

i realize it does not get you a balanced budget anytime soon. there are structural things that need to be dealt with. i don't look at it as though you can only do one thing at a time. we will look at it across the scope of the government. you will see a regular drumbeat as we do oversight and identify waste, fraud, and abuse and programs we do not need. we will bring those to the floor on a regular basis. we are going to turn the system on its head and make it easier to cut spending and to increase it. that is part of what our mission is in changing the rules to the extent we are allowed to. we will maximize the opportunity to put the taxpayers first and the spender's class. >> thank you for being with us. we will see back in washington next week.

next week is going to be an incredibly busy week in the capital. not only do we have the transition team but the lame- duck session is back. the charlie rangel ethics inquiry opens and the debt commission continues its suggestions for how to handle this. i am probably missing some other things as well. the important leadership elections -- of this at one time. how can that possibly get all of this done? how they keep the lame-duck session running wild reorganizing congress? >> there is no question the republicans are going to keep the pressure on. on things like tax cuts and spending, they have to do a stopgap measure to keep the government funded. republicans will say the democrats -- that the voters

sent the message and they don't want the democrats to do the things they are doing. the republicans are still in the minority for the time being. it will have all these new members in town, leadership elections and their orientation. it will certainly be a very busy week. some weighty decisions will be made. it could be very crazy here in washington. >> these lame duck sessions are always somewhat surreal. there are still elections that are yet unsettled and there is a lot of behind-the-scenes struggle still going on at least in the democratic ranks. the current house speaker, nancy pelosi, has announced she is running for minority leader. so far she has no opposition, but some think that is not the direction democrats need to go right now.

there is an incredibly active schedule of talks to the new members, how to organize an office, hire staff, how the legislative process works and what the rules are. on top of that, dinners and receptionshat will keep people really busy. what you will see in public is quite different from what will be going on in private. in many ways that will shape a lot more fully what the new congress will look like. mr. wald and referred to the fact that the democrats seem to be negotiating themselves from miles apart. how is the congress reacting? >> up until the elections we heard of one house that was not opposed to doing any kind of tax cut or continuation of the tax reduction for the wealthiest taxpayers. in recent days, we heard them start to signal that they might be more open to doing some of

that if it were temporary, in the interest of a deal to make sure that middle-class people get their tax cut. the outlines of the deal are pretty clear, but there are still a lot of liberals who are unhappy that in order to get a tax cut for the middle-class people, that you have to throw in large reductions for millionaires. that is part of what is behind some of the back and forth your hearing. not everyone is happy with it. >> there is less energy going into the right -- right sizing the house and restructuring. >> he suggested putting it suggestion boxes around the building to take suggestions. this is an institution that does not change very often. the house sch