>> thank you. my dad loved talking about a sounded dollars. after the success in 1981, addressing the soundness of the dollar was the next task on his list. it never got finished in his time. as head of the foundation and whose goal is to recognize exceptional leaders, one of the levels of the engagement is on critical issues. our soundness of the dollar is certainly one of the key issues that my dad cared about it deeply and believed is the foundation not just for us to

live with -- people want. dad appreciated that. why dad got that -- got is that we want to grow into a creature means. you cannot do that without a sound dollar. this is incredibly exciting for me. i got tired of hear my dad talking about a dollar that is as good as gold. al is the only one around. the debate is taking place. the discussion is happening. the need to engage this discussion. we look forward to being a part of that discussion and fostering a real discussion in the idea

is. we have to agree leaders today to embody that, migke pence and paul ryan. they want to engage in the idea is. it is an honor to be here to enthusiasm's it is an honor to be here. here.you for being [applause] >> thanks. let me close by saying it is the idea of trust and having a

stable foundation based on personal responsibility.] that is the crux. no one sacrifices consumption if they do not believe in a greater future harvest. it is an expression of faith in the future. there are reasons to acheive ieve sound money. in the end, the cause of honest money is for reasons even more profound. in dr. runnymede -- in deuteronomy, we learn that you should have a perfect and just a

measure so your days may be lengthened in the land. every bank in the late anne klein issued by the u.s. government has engraved on it "in god we trust." that should be a reminder that we should never take our money for accountable government for granted. thank you. >> he is a one-man think tank. his dramatic -- roadp map points toward fiscal sanity and economic growth.

i think paul knows what that means.' john was the chairman in the days leading up to the republican revolution of 1994. we would point to him as a disciplinarian. we expect him to believe that idea that continues. >> thank you. i was raised by jack kemp. i guess we are all getting the band back together.

this is the best 25 pages on money i have read in a long time. i will be tweeting this all day and week long, encouraging people to read this. this encapsulate it all. i do not want to give a redundant speech. sound money is a necessary precondition it is something that only civil society can function run if they want to remain a civil society. you cannot have a system of strong, organic, real, true economic growth without the soundness of your money system the our fiscal policy is on a collision course with our monetary policy. no matter how many times the

federal reserve comes here and pounds on the podium, we are not going to monetize the debt. what on earth they doing right now? they would like to say that they are not monetizing the debt for . they intend to monetize to lower interest-rate and not the debt. but if the actions for the what is happening here in government is a systematic replacement of the rule of law by the rule of man. let's get our fiscal policy. look at our foreign partners

where are we? a divided people are not familiar with the precepts of sound money. we have a non inflationary environment. those of us here in the next generation, i was born in 1970. i'm not that old. we did not know if this stuff was. we were not around. we were in grade school. we were little kids kurta we did not understand -- we were of little kids. we did not understand the ideas for t.

there is nothing more insidious that a government can do than to debase its currency. they believe they have this figured out there are interest in reserves for ts they believe they can turn this on, run the printing presses over time, and moffett up in time to prevent inflation from getting out of control.

they believe that they can figure all of this out, re the economy. what can we do? we are driving down the highway, looking in the rearview mirror. they have been an upward revised. we are driving the car with 2

feet long, one on the gas and one on the break. regulations are transparent, affair. getting spending under control. first and foremost is sound money. these are the basic foundations professional those of us from our corners are going to be advancing. we are trying to understand this. i will be read introducing a bill.

i have been in congress for 12 years. we have introduced this bill. it is price stability. this is the only arm of our governments in charge of the currency. all this other government are not in charge. the fed is a sole guarantor. we want to give this law back to it.

they are showing them how they are doing it. we can stabilize investment horizons of people half hepburn face -- so that people had faith. it is about restoring behof the value of the dollar. we are the world's reserve currency for now. these of the things that will affect our feature in made america is so unique. the better off we will be. of these issues are in with one another.

do we want to reapply the roll hall -- rule of law so we all have the opportunity to make it? do you want to get back to our system that is as good as gold? it is a system that says no matter who you are, you can be who you want to be. we do not want the government setting the rules. we want the rule of law reestablished. the rule of law is a society that can grow and prosper we can push the bounds of opportunism.

that is the society we want. this comes to us in a couple of forms for them. it put this in a spiral. we lose our standard of living. we take away the chance of making more of their lives. we do not want this where we transform our safety net occurred there. these are they tiffin point we are reaching.

this is an issue that has to come back. it is something we cannot take for granted. if we do, america's best century will be this century and not the past. thank you very much. >> thank you. next up is dr. larry white. he has taught at the university of st. louis. he has been a visiting lecturer. is the author of a number of books and articles.

>> fence made a number of commons. my favorite was " [unintelligible] i do not had time to talk about every case in every respect at which the fed has failed us. are they should stay within the limits. they know this is deciding which sector should be allocated. the documents released have only

confirmed that the fed has failed those of us who believe in the rule of law. i do not want to focus on recent events. they have failed on their own terms. the of not been frequent or shorter. defenders will say that we do not want to go to the system

that existed before. it has not made them less frequent. it is in short order. those were worse. and led to the collapse and output. defenders no longer say that it has abolished financial panics. not a judge let's them on one mistake because the fed is learning. how many times a day have to say that? has the fed increased real

growth? no. we should not expect them to do those things. it should focus on one objective, which is using the control and cannot improve rural economic growth. there is not any rationale for them to have a dual or bipolar mandate. what they can control and dust control is the purchasing power of the dollar. before they can the dollar by year constant, on the watch, the dollar has lost 95% of the purchasing power.

is having them in charge consistent? we have to ask ourselves for them. >> is a more predictable? they face more uncertainty about the purchasing power of the dollar then they face under the standard for th. sheave a provision in it? -- should they prevent it?

it is a good thing they prices are allowed to fall. there is a second kind of deflation that is bad. the fed has wiped out episodes of good deflation. goods became cheaper and cheaper. have been several episodes of bad deflations. for no credit to the fed for that. it has not happened.

even since world war ii, although they used to seem to say that the economy was more stable, the statistics that we now have no longer say that. she is never been a tea party person. they were biased. they only included a few commodities. today we measure more wildly. as we adjust them, the pre-fed time looks more stable.

it this diversified in agricultural. we should expect improve stability if he read day the old recessions, it was one month longer.

the case becomes even stronger i am not saying that we should go back to the exact system we have the foyer -- before, because it was far from the financial market. various regulations weaken the banks. after the panic of 1907, congress had concluded that the system was broken and a serious changes needed to improve them. in 2010, we have just as much

reason as people had in 1910 to conclude that it is broken. hopefully, we will try free banking. >> the issue presents i believe is a kickoff. they get a copy of the money predella this of the the building blocks for a serious national debate. i would like to ask them to come

up with closing remarks. >> thank you. i want to say how thrilled the rtc this moving to the discussions where it belongs. the history is intertwined in different ways with the legacies. as he noted, our guide to some money and has a " from liberty on the back. they should concentrate the efforts of monetary policy. many of us believe in this.

it ignores the urging. they are looking to find passed a thinly this back. their partnership is getting distributed. they are thrilled to be including it. they are seeing it from representatives. i'm very excited to see where this will lead.

they are looking at money principles. you can download the guided to some money in its entirety. it supports the educational work. anyone with new ones to learn can do this. please, join me in thanking our distinguished panel of speakers. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> a forum on tax reform and

deficit reductions. a discussion on immigration issues. later, a ceremony and the u.s. capitol christmas c-span's latest book is thing offered from our issues the pitta it is the first boat to tell the story of the supreme court. the supreme court gives readers a personal and compelling the of the modern court. there 16 pages of photographs

detailing the history. be sure to use the promo code. >> next, a form on reducing the deficit in changing the tax code burda and also discuss the president's tax code agreements prevent a. >> why do not we get under way? i and the president of the urban

institute. i want to do well to the emir. it will enhance components of the various proposals that have been issued over the course of the last few months by various commissions that have been charged with looking at the fiscal situation and how we might reduce our deficit and slow down the explosive growth of federal debt. as you all know, yesterday the president and the leaders in congress reached an agreement to reduce taxes on several fronts the deficit and debt commissions

has spoken with one voice, saying that as our economy strengthens we have to go on a fiscal diet that will include with polite company. this is not seem to be the message the political system has decided to celebrate this consensus would not a need to diet but with another heaping plates and dessert. all, no a desert for matter how overweight we might be. it to come in many flavors. there will not be much dessert

served here today. there are reports that call for revenue enhancement and tax reform. they talk about the diet yes to come. various peoples served on various commissions. tidbits them started out correctly, i am going to start with the far end. he is the 80 director of the national reform.

he is the ceo of the democratic leadership council. he served for eight years in the white house. she was the co-chair of the bipartisan hayeks task force. she is also a member of the simpson commission. we can tie i the two together. sheila is a founding director of

the congressional budget office. she was the director during the clinton is a ministration. this started a career as the assistant secretary. he was the co-chair of the national academy of national research committee on the fiscal feature of the united states.

i serve on the spur them -- the team. we have full transparency. he is a director of the congressional budget office. he has been a american fellow and the is the center for economic policy. . donald is a director of the policy center here. he is a member of the other commission.

he was the deputy tractor of the -- director of the office. has been a senior economic adviser to the council as well. he also served as a chief economist at the joint economic committee. he was a frequent writer.

we turned it over. he kept a discussion going. >> thank you. let me start with a basic question. the charge of your commission was deficit reduction. you chose to look at tax tree farm. >> with the scale of the daedaluses we face, we concluded that we will do more and wanted to start a serious discussion.

we have to leave behind childish things. it seemed the ideal candidate. it developed over the course of our deliberations. it could have a spending problem. it is the limited to discretionary spending. the more the it went wrong, the

more convinced they were that it became the we had to do sweeping change for them. >> there are several options. it is one that you cannot get out of. it is hard to believe we can persuade conservatives to go along with it. the king get those lower

marginal tax rates. the current system is such an inefficient mass. it is hard to create this. people say it was not so bad. they are going to add 3.8 surtax.

it is a 3% tax rate. i think we do have to be careful. we will really push them. >> tell us why you went down that road.

one of the things that is not realize by people who are strong as they normally have a system. they want to make it more progressive again. they can blow up the system and start over. so we do not have such upper income provisions. that was what we did. we had some very big people working on this plan.

is started by saying let's start over. you can bring the rates down. there are earnings of the credit for their they will be more generous. they did it for a big reason. you want to preserve those, but not in a way that disproportionately benefits the

risk. they do it at a lower level. i could benefit from the mortgage reduction. it is a credit for them they itemize it. they are much more progressive.

>> was with your thinking? >> it to be in the tax system for them. there is an awful lot of money into play with. there is room to improve this by reducing rates and more money to

build them. >> it is difficult for some to be a member. the perception is the aeacus sell an expected make it easier .or the let's do it in a way where we are reducing rates. for a category of folks, they can lead to easier file their

taxes it to be a much simplified personnel. >> the criticizecriticism is whe we cutting tax rates for rich people at a time we are trying to reduce the budget deficit? >> it is simple. we are not cutting taxes for those people.

>> i was neutral when it started. then it did it slightly less progressive. we kept average tax rates about the same. >> you came up with your group as well? >> we live dead these statistics. the richest people in america are paying 16.

our plan is distributional me neutral. >> one of the things people did not focus on was there. it when have capital gains. >> it is an interesting one. a i think this probably had departed your discussions as

well. >> there is a fundamental flaw and how we are looking at it. it shows how much tax increases will affect different groups. and yet again how different income groups to be affected. when you do this, and looks like they will get hurt. the whole purpose is to prevent the whole economy from getting into trouble. what we are looking at is how these policies compare to a situation where we would go into the fiscal crisis and how they compare mr. fiscal crisis.

if you look at islander increase, who is getting across the income spectrum. we should be looking and the distribution tables as everybody benefiting to some degree. there is the distribution of all of the changes. >> certainly in the terms that he has just suggested. i believe that we are facing a high probability of a threat to our economy. 1/2 orrin hatch.

we do not know exactly when or what form, but if we had a big spike in interest rates, we coud have a recession that makes this one looked rather trivial. i think we did know that this is very bad for low income working people. we are seeing it now. it could be a lot worse if we were in a prolonged recession with high unemployment. this is what i think needs to be held out with the distribution of the tax changes. >> this may be unfair is the

distribution. this is something that skews the debate? >> the general rule is set -- you manage what the measure. we have a model we can news. go to our website. you'll see links to it. the feeling that our tables, you will discover they have a lot of numbers on them. one of the reasons has been that

different people have different perceptions. we tried to provide the possible ways. he can think about the impact of these proposals. at the moment, people differ dramatically out what they think the basic point is. >> another issue is taxes and spending. talk to us about what the

starting point was for the president's commission. did you start with some? did it of all? >> it did of of. -- adolph -- evolve. on almost every case you had to do both. for understandable reasons, spending cuts tended to pull more of the weight. it is difficult to tax your way out of a whole. part of that is a political balancing act. democrats are at 100% increases.

this is not make any sense to us. we tried to have a balanced package that was on the scale to solve the problem that could command the bipartisan support. that has some track record. >> did you start with a ratio and work from there? >> restart it with spending cuts. that was his influence.

let's say how much we can do. i think he was disappointed of what we put together a of what seem like just -- coliseum like drastic freezes and cuts. it seems to be an aggressive package. it did not add up. we realize we are going to have to do more on the revenue side. we also began licking at the tax code. the tax expenditures are just huge. they have a favorite

distribution.

-- all weekend, every weekend on c-span3.

>> "washgton journal" continues. our next guest is here to talk to us about the dream act. what is it? guest: there has been an issue by partisans to force enforcement by any means necessary on an immigrati -- on immigration. this has been going on for decades. there is a big push to promote amnesty. but having the unsuccessful at pass an amnesty, which the call comprehensive -- having been unsuccessful at passing an amnesty legislation, they call that comprehensive immigration reform.

they feel that the parameters make the bill more appealing. the reason why the dream that is so controversial is that it is being overlaid against the template of no credibity in the executive for enforcement and a strong sense among the american people that this is not a priority that congress ought to be pursuing in a lame- duck session. the dream act is essentially a big, private bill. in the 1970's, it was about a bribery scandal -- getting a private bill through congress. it is a legal form of graft. people are brought here under a certain age and. they have been here for a certain amount of time. they may be the sponsors to open, but then maybe as old as 30 or 35. through this debate -- this dizzying array of complex

versions, harry reid and nancy pelosi are trying to get through this very complex piece of legislation without even seasoned washington observers understanding what is precisely in the bill, what it entails, and what it means for downstream immigration numbers and policy. it allows certain people to get non-immigrant or temporary status, like a visitor visa status, which can be renewed indefinitely. you can get this if you meet certain educationalarameters, get a ged, enroll in college. it is nominally designed to try to encourage people to get an education. you do not have to graduate from college. you can enroll in the milary. the idea is, if you graduate, you can get your green card treaty can petition for

relatives and then start the -- you can get your green card. you can petition for relatives and get as -- get the chain started. this continu a pattern of politicians -- some politicians, not jeff sessions from alabama -- some politicians continue promising amnesty in a way that promotes further illegal immigration. there is no question that the big batch into the dream act -- the so-called dream act is that it would continue to promote illegal immigration at a time when the admintration is attacking the american people who are trying to get the situation under control. host: let me invite the viewer to phone in with questions and comments. we have separe lines for republicans and democrats and indendents. we will get your calls in just a

couple of minutes. the house and senate could take votes on this item as early as tomorrow, from what we're reading. we want to show you the other de of the issue from a guest we had on the program on sunday. . here is the clip. guest: wheeler talking about a targeted group who grew up in it -- we are taing about a targeted group of peop who grew up here. the are willing to put their lives on a line. we're talking about kids with degrees in sciencelaw, medicine. i ha met a lotf people who are very impressive, yet we deny them the opportunity to contribute to the country they grew up in. it does not make sense to me. host: "upstanding, impressive

people which braque what is the problem? "upstanding, impressive people." what is the problem? guest: under an entirely different tableau, they would have been increasing robust employer sanctions and enforcement. it would have supported the arizona immigration law. it would not be in the supreme court trying to attack the employer sanction law. ubermensch and nevers clear signal -- they would be sending a very clear signal. it will solve problems that would prevent recurrence. once again, frank sharry os misrepresenting the bill. you do have theight to petition relatives. we have dramatically

underestimated immigration levels. the census is having to adjust their numbers higher than they projected, soaring to 350 million people. this bill will have downstream implications for that. the administration of the train act will hamstring the department of homes -- of the dream act will hamstring the dhs for years. it will decimate immigration enforcement. people who get benefits under the bill will have equity to argue that their parents should not be deported. when they're 21, they can petition for their parents. then their parents can turn around and petitioned people. it will dramatically increase immigration. what he and his allies are doing is politicizing. it i not going to pass the senate. host: why are they bringing it up now? guest: they are ying to eliminate -- they say this,

"alienate hispanic voters from a republican party." no one denies that people have worked hard and done well, but they are citizens of other countries. what a great message it would be to encourage people to go back to theirome countries. it would stop sending the message that, if you come here illegally, you would be rewarded. host: thank you for waing. color >> -- caller: you had a proponent of the bill who kept saying that there are 11 million illegals in this country. we all know there are 25 million. these people broke along.

they are -- broke law. they are criminals. get them out of here. host: is it that simple? guest: it ought to be that simple. immigration is a civil status. you're either eligible for the portable -- all little or deport -- you are either eligible or deportable. it is far too complex for taxpayers. the deportation process is hopelessly complex. the dream act will add more layers of complexity. that has been one of the biggest arguments against it, that it furthers this schizophrenia, the idea that we have created that the u.s. lacks the will to get serious about enforcing the law. there are no measures of any consequence that will prevent a recurrence of more illegal immigration. the ll gives all of these people work authorizations.

we have so many people unemployed. it will make them eligible for student loan assistance. it will be going to community colleges, which are turning americans away because of overcrowding. why is this a priority? there's a sense of growing frustration about the misplaced priorities. what was this election about if it was not about more robust and meaningful immigration enforcement? why is harry reid trying to ram this bill through the lame-duck when it is so far down the list of priorities of the electorate that it is hard to understand? host: welcome to the program. caller: thank you. i have a couple of comments. first of all, i am in my 80's.

i have paid social security and my insurance all my life. i am disabled now. the illegals come in here and they draw social security. they do not pay in. we give them food stamps for grandmas and aunts and uncles and then they get social security. at think it is very unfai to the american people. the republicans have said we will use the lower-paying people -- the world heading for a bad disaster. i resent paying for their health care when i live on $14,000 per year, paying for my home and stuff. this has been going on for years. host: not an uncommon refrain on

the program. guest: uc at 10. -- you see a tin ear on some of the people on the left. there are attacked in arizona employer sanctions bill. when congress continues to extend unemployment benefits, the normal market process by which americanwould be relocati in the united states to find jobs is being distorted by the presence of so many illegal immigrants. the so-called dream act fuels' a sense that is growing elements -- amongst the public that people are getting things they're not entitled to. why do want to punish the kids for being brought here illegally? it is not punishing the kids, and not rewarding the parents, or the kids. if your parents do not pay your taxes, they can go to jail or

get centered in congress. there are going to be consequences to the children for the apparent failure to file tax. punishing the kids would be the equivalent of violate -- of prosecuting them for violating immigration law. they can leave the country, go home, do everything ia citizen of that couny can do. giving them green cards and the right to petition their parent is an affirmative reward for both the parents and children for having broken the law. people are right to be concerned that, at times when americans are losing jobs, losing housing, benefits cut back, we see people in congress continuing to provide benefits to people who are not entitled to them. host: fair.us.org. -- fairus.orgs the webte. we have about 35 minutes left.

a call from tulsa. independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i cannot believe some of the things i'm hearing from my government. either you're breaking the law or you are not. these people are being rewarded for breaking the law. when they are talking about separating families -- take them with you. more importantly, here in tulsa, the entry-level jobs, fast food chains for young kids -- fast food chains -- four young kids, learning how to work -- you have people working at mcdonald's and things that are 40 year-olds. we are rewarding them.

from i sitting n tulsa -- from sitting here in tulsa, this policy is racist. i got out to a hospital a few months ago. coming to the emergency room, it was overflowing with illegals. host: racist policy. the caller puts his finger on an important point. frank sharry and others have a created this impression that immigration policy can be bought for political purpose. the only rationale for this is some kind of putative political payoff. we know that the hispanic vote does not really a vote on the immigration issue. we have seen it over and over again.

the population is growing so favors that the skewe democrats. the impression is that democrats are using immigration picy for party-building purposes at the expense of the public interest and what the american people want. that is an incendiary combination. the tragedy is that there are people who are young people who have worked hard, done well in school, or being used as political pawnsor partisan purposes. and the idea is to build the allegiance of the hispanic electorate based on this cynical manipulation of public policy issue. we represent the american people. it would not make money off of immigration. -- we do not make money off of immigration. we're just neutral brokers. this bill is not in the public's interest, even though it is in

our interest to see young pple get educated. it is an interest to try to ensure that we attract people -- the best and brightest from all ov the world willtherwise go to other countries. host: here is a message from twitter. "they are going to the labor market and we have so many unemployed. that is simple-minded. they create jobs." guest: we're talking about people who are relatively low in still going into the market as a result of having work authorization. the bill does not require them to graduate. it will swell the ranks of the labor market. people will have relatively low skills. it will be overcrowding scarce education resources at 90 colleges at a time when americans are not able -- at community colleges at a time when americans are not able to get into these colleges.

on top of outsourcing jobs seeing costs go up, if you look at everything else -- on top of everything else -- you're going to set up fierce competition for community colleges, increased job competition. the democrats were fired in this last election. when you fire an employee, if you let them hang around office, they can do things against the employer's interest. we are the employers, the american people. they're trying to cram through some bills that are clearly not in the american people's interest. shame on them. host: let's take a few calls. fairfax, va., bill, republican. caller: i would like to know about the military side of this. i came across the dream act when

they were talking about the dod bill. i watched c-span a lot. we're talking about them joining the military. they still get the $90,000 for a free education -- do they get that? ho: let me go to david as well. what part of the issue do you want to speak to? caller: it iastonishing that republicans are a stent -- accusing the democrats of political manipulation. the republicans have a long history of political manipulation starting witthe southern strategy, the support of nader boters -- voters to take votes away from our core, the support of the citizens united case -- from al gore, the supports of the citizens united

case. host: hypocritical -- can you respond? guest: the comprehensive immigration reform, which obama pushed, does nothing to prevent a recurrence of the same problems that got us into this situation. how is that reform? the so-called comprehensive immigration reform is nothing but a massive blanket amnesty bill that would destroy it immigration enforcement and policy for the nex50 years. that is n reform. secondly, it is abt partisan advantage. i d not want to sound like a partisan guy. i know i do sometimes. the republican party has some players who are helping create a problem. in the chamber of commerce, there are others who use immigration to control labor costs who have been involved in supporting predatory practices that use immigration to decimate the bargaining leverage of american workers. it is the left, the extreme left, the aclu and others who

work in concert with the chamber of commerce on these issues that torch to the economic opportunity for the american people for the last 20 years. on the question of the g.i. bill -- there is already a provision in the law which allows the secretary of defense to enroll or enlist people here illegally for military services and they can get immigration benefits as a result. arguably, the bill is superfluous along those lines. using immigration policy to staff the military sounds like a lot like the roman empire, babylon -- we could go to the list of civilizations that have come and gone as a result of this kind of strategy. you can get lawful permanent resident status after two years of military service. i am not aware of any provision regarding the $90,000. i would have to go back and

consult the bill. in the end, the military -- the obama administration's military supports this provisio because they want to help their recruitment goals. we're seeing a cynical manipulation of immigration policy for special interest purposes. forget about whenever mythological ideas we have about immigration policy. it is about increasing enrollment and charging higher tuition. it is about the military, cheap labor interest wall street, alan greenspan, who said immigration is needed to drive down wages because amerin workers were getting paid too much. this is people who -- people wonder why this would be considered in the lame-duck legislation. just look at the players. -- we happy to see people of hundreds of thousands of activists around the country -- have hundreds of thousands of activists frothe country

pummelling the switchboard of congress, rising against the dream at. we have major opposition in the senate to stop this. as long as people did not let up the pressure, we can defeat this in this congress. host: cheryl in south carolina talking immigration. ller: excuse me, i am nervous. the congressional budget office announced the dream act would increase revenue by $2.3 billion. have they announced what the cost will be to the american taxpayer? i heard an estimate of $20 billion. guest: the cbo came up with the estimate but said because we were putting the beneficiaries in non-immigrant visa status, kind of like tourist visas, they came up with a series of assumptions in the estimates that showed a net wash.

the $2.3 bilon benefit is negligible in an economy of our size. and the estimates are off for a variety of reasons. the is definitely going to be follow-up legislation to try to create other status for people in the non-immigrant status even if they did not complete college. we feel that the cost estimates are wildly understated. after 10 years, imagine when they get green cards. there will be dramatic increases in the use of public benefits. 42% of taxpayers are not paying -- do not have a fighter -- pot -- do not have a positive federal tax liability. there will not be significant taxpayers over -- they will not be significant taxpayers

overturned. we believe this will cost taxpayers billions of dollars. they do not by the way that it covers education costs. host: you can read more about that at thehill.com. it estimates there would cut spending by $1.4 billion, but beyond 2020, the bill would begin to cost money. guest: this goes to the broader question -- what is the purpose of immigration? it is costing us money.

we need to rethink the purpose and redefine system by which we select immigrants so that it makes more sense for the american people and serves our national and domestic priorities. we're not cortisol the immigration debate by passing bills like this -- going to solve the immigration debate are passing bills like this so- called dream act. host: what does it mean if the house passes the bill? guest: and they did not want to face the wrath of their constituents. constitutionally, lame-duck sessions are treacherous. a responsible legislator would not cast of vote in the lame- duck except for truly adjutant -- exigent situations. taxes we're talking about

or federal spending, we're not going debate this -- to debate this. harry reid is a crafty g who has shown a complete lack of principle at times, including the way he has handled immigration. an awful lot of lousy stuff gets passed in the lame-duck. arguably, lame-duck sessions -- we have so many major decisions made in this country by judicial branches of government that are outside the political process. the lame-duck -- congress is one of the few remaining, potically sensitiveealms where the american voters have a say. if they can take it out of the normal sensitivity to the profit us, things can happen -- to the process, things can happen. caller: every year i get laid

off. 15 years ago, night shift. a lot of white guys. now, same factory, all latin americans. people cannot afford their mortgages. these guys can. you can't get a job. . caller: i agree with you 100% on all of these issues. my world this morning, i woke up and they were talking about joe scarborough and winning the class warfare issue. on this channel i see everyone talking about trade issues, which is a lose lose for america. i do not know where i can turn as a voter to find someone that

represents me except f the green party. i have followed their principles for years. i voted for them one time. it looks like it is the only way out. democrats and republicans said across the table and smile at each other -- like where are they going to go? >> there will be -- guest: there will be a tremendous amount of of people in this country over the next 15 years. we are going to phase in electoral politics unlike anythinge have ever seen in our lives. it always seemed like there was more at the table to share. multi-party democracies provide opportunities for issues like immigration and environmental issues to get more of a voice. unfortunately we have a dominant two-party system right now. we do have some folks in the

house, taking over in january. lamar smith, chairman of the judiciary committee, working on e immigration issue, correctly analyzing it, in our vie for a long period of time. he is seriously interested in the topic. jeff sessions on the senate side, there will be a very different dynamic on the immigration issue next year. which really raises the broader question of why you would want to legislate without hearings or proper deliberation? put this off until next year. take the opportunity to really analyze what we are doing on immigration issues. this is no way to legislate. i feel very sorry, myself, for the american people that feel of our political system does not representhe interests of the average person.

for the caller that called about labor displacement, where there is opportunity it is certain -- simply written off. elements in the democratic party that have decided that their future electoral advantage lies in young, non-caucasian voters, writing off the interests of other voters. they are ctinuing out with it this so-called dream back and i think the voters spoke loud and clear. in november where immigration was an issue in a race after race, the arizona bill was incredibly popular. why would nancy pelosi broad assault in the wound by considering legislation of this kind? diametrically opposed to what the american people clearly said that they wanted. host: my guest has been aormer

congressional staffer, president of the american immigration reform,, how long has that institution been around? >> since 1979. we were founded by a wide range of people from both parties. we represent the center on this issue and we get attacked from both sides because we are a major advocate for reforms that would minimize the 9/11 teat for sanctions in the 1980's. we have brought major litigation over the yearso try to equalize the leverage for american citizens. you know, it is a wonderful organization, if i say so myself. partly because it is relatively unique in american politics. host: how is it funded? guest: we have about 100,000

members. 70% are from -- 70 per% of the contributions are from the people. we have many major supporters that helped to build the organization, like warren buffett. host: here is a clear message -- -- twitter message -- guest: that is a speech this economic argument. ous economic argument. say someone here with an account -- with a high school degree is costing more than with a sales tax, if they were sent back to their own country, they could

take the skills back home and purchased american made products that would help the trade deficit. look, this entire idea that we will build an economy on low- skilled labor with high skilled education is so 19th century. we have really got to update how we are thinking about how immigration relates to a post- industrial immigration society. to the extent that we need immigration is high value added proprietary knowledge people that can expand production of the economy. we have the labor and the need for jobs fox. we have the talent and the know- how. there is no evidence that the american people are not capable of doing jobs in their own country. having the education and skills that they need that we need to continually reward. the taxpayers already provide a k-12 education for people that

bring their chiren here illegally. we have provided a very extensive public education. they probably got a better education than it would have in their he country. the patriotic thing would be for those children to take their skills back homand build up the economy is back home. host: champaign, illinois. caer: first-time caller. host: glad to have you. caller: i would like to say that the dream act is not so much an issue of immigration but as of handling the problemwe have now. in all aspects other than being born here, participating in the culture, they are american. some of their parents pay taxes even though they do not have to. but they are left in the dust. if they get a degree and they are not legal is not worth

anything to anyone. they are already involved in the economy. guest: echoing my earlier point, that somehow this is a zero sum game. look, if we educate people, even if we do not want to, we are investing in them in a way and we can look at it as an extension of foreign aid. so that when they go back home they put those educational skills to work. helping to build those economies back home. if we accept the proposition, president obama's proposition, that immigration laws will never be enforced in this country, you can make a solid argument that giving people education makes sense. never deporting them. but that is not our position. our position is that the

american peoe has not only the right but theuty and capacity to enforce and we must enforce those laws or we will no longer be a nation. the dream that is flawed because it does not come up with n.v. -- and then what -- answer. how do you prevent a recurrence of more illegal aliens coming in and taking advantage outside of the law if you send this kind of message we can all understand a young person's desire to do well. it is to be commended. believe me, the moral and ethical issues here are difficult. and i do not want people to think that we do not feel the tension underlying these issues. but ultimately in the end of this is about doing the right thing in alo run. it is irresponsible legislating to offer amnesty benefits without giving the american people even a shred of promise

that these things wl not occur. that is why this bill in the senate is so cynical. it appears to not be a good- faith proposal. it is a cynical immigration policy for partisan gain. republicans taking on the chin because of hispanic voters? that is playing party politics with america's immigration policy. that is incomprehensible. taking the national debate on who we are in who we will be and turning it into a partisan political football. host: memphis, tennessee, republican. what do you have to say? debt -- caller: i am a radical republican. host: what does that mean? caller: president hayes in 1881 made a deal with southern states to become president.

the construction was ended. here we are, african-americans that have been emancipated and free. but we have no [unintelligible] because of the racm and bigotry that we see. listening to all of this rhetoric, i do not see that they are having a conversation where we can overcome all of this hypocrisy. guest: i am not sure that i understand the caller. but there is an inherent racial tension within our society. no one can doubt that. at the same time, i think, and we think this is fair, we have

had a robust immigration debate with tremendous demographic a change over the last 30 years. more so than any country in the history of western civilization. the american people have been remarkably excepting and tolerant. we are extremely impressed with how willing the american people are to absorb people that come fromifferent countries, cultures, with new ideas. but there is an inhert tension in subterranean ethnic and racial bias amongst people. remember, when immigration was brought down in the 1920's it created the market forces that encourage people that had lived in the south to come to the north in search of jobs. major aances were made inhe civil rights movement, during world war ii, i am black and white relations.

when you open up the floodgates to massive immigrati you underline market forces and the tension creates incentives for people to come together. even though it is under the nominal idea of creating diversity, what it really does is create social distance. we see a great deal of that now. think about the community most negatively affected by the dream act. the most disadvantaged people that need subsidized student loans, who need public university. it is not like every university is getting open admission. in fact, public universities and community colleges are increasing tuition now. they are actually putting caps on enrollment. so, you are going to have this kind of debate when you refuse to recognize that we live in a

era of limits. it is not responsible for legislators to think that we can spend our way out of every problem. host: let's hear from a few more folks. long island, nick, democratic line. caller: i just want to comment on one thing. all ofhis bickering about the immigrants, the only problem i have with that is you need to take care of the american people right now. a lot of these people do not spend their money in america, they spend it that at all -- back at home. worry about the aricans. i do not think that this is a time that they should even talk about the dream that. >> -- host: jeff, you get the last word.

caller: thank you. good morning. this is something that you nee to include in your conversation. what is an american? i am a german deended american. my parents were born here. i am able american. my neighbor, whose parents were born here, he is labeled an african-american. our governments has use policies of discrimination true racial labeling of different subspecies of americans. to say that only if you are a white person you are american -- hispanic american, african american, you were born in another place. the problem is labeling. we need to label americans as americans. guest: he is talking about some broader issues. the only way that we will come here as a people as if we come together under one banner and one label.

those subdivisions he was talking about were built up for political purposes. now, because immigration introduces ethnic change, there is a system around the voting rights act whereby the democratic party views immigration as something that expands its constituency for its own political power base. at the expense potentially of national unity. hispanic american voters that vote republican generally want to be viewed as americans, they are interested in assimilation. there is an institutional desire among some to maintain these differences because of the economic spoils that have been built up around these differences. the framers of the constitution would have said that we come from all over the world to buy into this wonderful experiment in republican democracy where we hold allegiance to our land and

sets of ideas. demanding preferences based on race, group rights, this is antithetical. if they used beneficiaries of the dream that to meet diversity goals, you are just adding one more discriminatory factor that works against other groups in exchange for providing these benefits. quorum call be rescind. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. lemieux: i rise to speak

to the body iave been a privileged of. representing floridians has been the privilege of a lifetime. now that privilege is coming to eangdz. standing here on the floor of the united states senate to address my colleagues just one last time, i am both hum balinged and grateful. humbled by this tremendous institution, by its work, and by the statesmen i have had the portunity to serve with, whom i know only fm afar but now grateful that i can call those same men and women my colleagues. nothing er worth doing -- my time here is no exception. the past 16 months i have asked the folks that work with plea to try to get six years of service out of that time. they have worked tirelessly to do that. my chief of staff, my deputy chief of staff vivian martinez, state director carlos robello,

ben moncrief, maureen jaeger, brian walsh, frank walker, spencer wayne, victor sarvino, taylor booth and many, many other have made our time here worthwhile and i thank all of them. i especially thank vivian and maureen who left their families and gave up precious time with their children to come to washington to support me in these efforts. i'm also thankful to the people whwork in our state office. time and time again when i travel around florida, i am encountered by people who have received such a warm reception from the men and women who serve usn florida and help people deal with problems with the federal government. i am grateful for their work. senator mcconnell has provided me with opportunities beyond my expectations. he is a great leader, and i am grateful to him.

senators alexander, burr, cornyn, kyl, mccain, corker, many others have taken me under their wing and mentored me, and i am appreciative of them. chairman rockefeller and levin, i thank for the work in your committees. senators whitehouse, baucus, we have worked together in a commonsense way to pass legislation that' good for the american people, and i am appreciative of your efforts. senator mel martinez ably held the seat before me. he has been generous in his advi and counsel. senator nelson and his wife grace have been warm and welcoming mikey and i to washington. i am thankful for your courtesy. i want to thank governor crist. he has afforded me tremendous opportunities for public srvetion and i am grateful. i want to say a special thank you to my parents.

my father, my grandfather, rather, in 1951 drove his 1949 pontiac from waterbury, connecticut to fort lauderdale, florida, with his wife and five kids piled in the back. he didn't know anybody. he didn't have a jofnlt but he went there to make a better life for his family. he worked in the trades and construction. he built houses. he taught my father the same thing. as my faer worked in the hot florida sun, he had onembition for his son, that i would get to work in the air conditioning. i have achieved so much for because of their sacrifice. they sent me to college and to law school and i will forever be grateful for what they have done for me. my most heartfelt appreciation go to my wife mikey. when i learned of this appointment, i met her at the door of our home in tallahassee and she was crying.

she was not just cryg because she was happy. she was crying because she was worried. we at the time had three small sons, max, taylor and chase, 6, 4, and 2 at tevment and she andi knew something that others didn't know, which is that we were going to have another baby. that baby was born here in washington, our daughter, baby madeleine. throughout all of my travels, she has been an unfailing support for me, and i love her dearly. i am appreciative to her. it has been the privilege of my life to serve here, but i wou not be filling my charge in my final speech if i didn't tell you what weighs on my mind and lays upon my heart about the direction of this country. so what i say to you now is with all due respect, but it is with the candor that it deserves. the single-greatest threat to the future of our republic and the prosperity of our people is

this congress's failure to control its spending. in my maiden speerchg i lamented a world where my children would one day come to me and say that they were going to find an opportunity in another country instead of staying here in america because those opportunities were better there. in one year's time, that lament has proven to be too optimistic because the challenge that confronts us will not wait until my children grow up. when i came to congress just 15 months ago, our national debt was $11.7 trillion. today it stands at $13.7 trillion. it has gone up $2 trillion in 15 months. it tk this country 200 years to go $1 trillion in debt. our interest payment on our debt service is nearly $200 billion now.

at the end of the decade, when our debt will be nearly $26 trillion, that interest payment will be $900 billion. when that interest payment is $900 billion, this government will fail. and long before that time, the world markets will anticipate that, and our markets will crash. this is not hyperbole. it is the truth. no since world war ii has this country faced a greater threat. not since the civil war h this threat come from within. how has congress arrived at this moment? for the past 40 years it's spent more than it could take. it has borrowed from social security and forgn governments, failing to make the honest choices and prioritizing what it should spend.

budgeting in washington seems to be nothing more than adding to last year's budget. we are funding the priorities of the 1-9d60's, 1970's, 1980's, 1990's without any real evaluation as to whether or not those are still good priorities and certainly not as to whether they're being done efficiently and effectively. it would be as if a teenage child received not only all the gifts on their christmas lits list this year but the gifts on all of their christmas gifts going back to when they were three. it is clear congress is capable of solving this problem with business as usual. what is needed is across-the-board spending cap to right the ship. an across-the-board spend cap will necessitate oversight and require prioritization. congress will finally have to do what businesses and families do all across this country: make tough choices. make ends meet.

i have proposed such a cap. i have proposed going back to 2007-level spending across the board. was our spending in 2007 so austere that we could not live with it jt three years later? if we did, we would balance the budget in 12013, and we would cut the not debt in half by 2020. and you would save america. unlike most problems that congress addresses, this problem is uniquely solvable by congress. congress can't win wars, only the brave men in our military, who we especially remember on this day, december 7, of all those who've served for our country in all of our wars who keep us safe and free -- only those men and women can win a war. congress cannot lead us out of

recession. only job creators or businesses can create jobs. but this problem is solely of congress's making, and uniquely solvable by this body. what congress should do is strengthen its oversight. the lack of oversight in washington is breathtaking. evaluate all federal programs, keep what works, fix what you should, get rid of the rest, return the money to the people, and use the rest to pay down this cataclysmic debt. the recent work of the debt commission is a good start, and i commend my senate colleagues who voted for this measure. it was courageous for them to do so. but out-of-control spending is not just a threat because it is unsustained. it is also changing who we are as americans. remember our founders told us

that the powers delegated to the federal government were few panned defined. -- were few and defined. the powers to the states numerous, indefinite, extending to the causes that concern the lives, liberties and property of the people. the size of the federal government is corrosive to the american spirit. the good intentions of members of congress to solve every real or perceived problem with a new federal program and the false light of praise that attaches to giving away of the people's money is endangering our republic. every new proam chips away at what it means to be an american, harms our spirit and replaces our self-reliance with dependency, supplants an opportunity ethic with an entitlement culture. it is at its face un-erican. it is not the government's role

to deliver happiness. rather, it's the role to stand clear of that path to allow our people to pursue that god-given right. what has created our prosperity, after all, is not our government. it is our free-market system of capitalism. it is through the healthy cut and thrust of the marketplace at new technologies, new jobs and new wealth is created. through that dynamic process, some win and some lose. but it allows all of our people, regardless of their race, gender, creed, color or background the opportunity to succeed or fail. and it ensures for us that unique expression, "only in america" is not just a refrain from the past but an anthem for the future. can you imagine the tragedy if the downfall of the american experiment was caused by a failure of thi congress to

control its spending? the challenge of this generation is before you and it is not beyond your grasp. there is nothing that we as americans cannot do. we have fought imperial japan and nazi germany at the same time and beaten both. we have put a man on the moon. we have mapped the human genome. and in the spare bedrooms and garages and dorm rooms of our people, our citizens have created the greatest inventions and the greatest businesses that the world has ever known which have employed millions of people and allowed them to pursue their dreams all in the freest and most open society in the history of man. we are that shining city on the hill. we are that beacon of freedom. we are that last best hope for mankind upon which god has shed

his grace. president theodore roosevelt said that one of the greatest gifts that life has to offer is the opportunity to do work that is worth doing. i can't think of a greater gift than the work that lies before you. righteous in its cause, noble in its purpose, and essential for the prosperity of our people. i will always cherish the relationships that i have gained here and the work that we have done together. god bless you, god bless the united states senate, and god bless our great

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> before we get to that big moment, i would like to welcome members of congress, distinguished guests, our capitol hill neighbors and those of you who are visiting our nation's capital today. thank you for joining us on this cold and breezy evening. i would especially like to acknowledge the wyoming delegation, senator john barasso, congress come cynthia lummis. each year the united states capital historic society produces a beautiful ornament and presents the congress with one to place on this christmas tree. so at this time, i would like to introduce a former member of congress and the president to united states capital

historical society, ron. ron? >> thank you, steve. >> you're welcome. >> thank you again for the opportunity to be here to once again present one of our ornaments to you to hang on the tree. this year we have a very, very beautiful onidentical which includes the dome and the tree. this year it is a metal onidentical. you go get this if you get on our website, but again, it is my honor to be here to take part in this ceremony. steve, here is the ornament for your tree. >> thank you. thank you. that is beautiful and quite fitting that that this year ears ornament features the iconic capital dome behind us. well, for 40 years, the department of agriculture and

the ark tect capital have brought a christmas tree to the nation's capital each year. which altogether comprise 193 million acres of forest and grasslands in the united states. i would like to smeskly thank all of of -- specifically thank all of the dedicated staff who helped us make this event possible. let's all help give them a round of applause as well. [applause] joining us tonight is jay jensen. he would like to share a holiday message with all of you. jay? >> ok. it is cold out here. i hope the tidings of the season will bring warmth to

all. it is my pleasure to be part of this ceremony today. speaker pelosi, senator enzo, congresswoman lummis. distinguished guests. i wish to wish everyone here a merry christmas and happy holiday season. thank you for coming to brave the cold to be part of this year's lighting to have capital christmas tree. this tree comes from the richard teeton national forest in wyoming as a gift from the people of wyoming. it is a beautiful spruce and as a forester i can say it is one of the finest that i have seen. tall and surely strong like to citizens of wyoming. there are countless stories of getting a tree like this here including the wonderful ornaments that you see on the tree selected from over 17,000 handmade ornaments from the

people of wyoming. the trees decorate our offices and buildings. our volunteers donated thousands of hours. they have made many generous donations. this tree symbolizes the holiday spirit of giving and i would like to extend my gratitude to everyone involved. this tree comes to us because leaders long ago had the wisdom and foresight to establish a great system of public lands called the national forests. we sustained those national forests for the benefit of the current generation and generations to come. but we can't do it alone. it takes partnerships and clabrakes to get this tree on its 4,600 mile journey here to the capital and takes people who live in the land, who use it and know it and who cherish

its beauty and rely on its resources. it draws upon old friendships and builds new partnerships as we need more efforts such that is to continue brilled building this great country of ours tree by tree. thanks again to the people of wyoming and to everyone involved in bring us this tree. you a bit of truly special place and hopefully this tree can be a reminder to all of us during this holiday season of the importance of connecting people to the land. thank you. merry christmas and happy holidays. [applause] >> thank you.

>> just a week ago the tree arrived on the west front of the capital. didn't our grounds grew do a marvous job decorating it? i would also lake to thank ted, our capital grounsd superintendent who had the tough task this year of selecting one tree from the many beautiful trees found in the teeton national forest. next i would lightning to into someone who is instrumental in having the tree come here. please welcome senator john barrasso. [applause] >> well, it is the first time ever for wyoming and it was worth the wait. it is an absolutely -- it is absolutely gorgeous. [applause]

bobby and i are are so thrilled that you could join us, that you could be here and mike and cynthia and i travel around the state and the former governor is here. all of us said, you know, we need more wyoming in washington. wyoming values. independence. determination. honesty. hard work. and the work that went into getting this here wasn't done by the congressional delegation. it was done by all of you. you're the ones that made the ornaments. mike and cynthia and i were concerned. could we actually get 5,000 ornaments. well, we were concerned but it turned out to be five then 10 then 15, almost 20,000 ornaments made by the people of wyoming. [applause] the people said it might be

cold. the all-city children's choir of cheyenne, they don't worry about the cold, do you? [applause] well, i just want to thank thousands and thousands of people from wyoming who turned out as this tree traveled through the roads of wyoming stopping 1,000 people in cody, 1,500 in jackson, 1,000 in wheatland, all coming to see this tree, because this tree is a gift from the people of wyoming to the united states to celebrate christ's birth, and with that, all of us, all of us from wyoming wish this country a very merry christmas. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you, senator barrasso.

next i would like to introduce senator michael enzi. [applause] >> well, i do want to particularly welcome the hundreds of wyoming people who came for this. that's a big percentage of our population. [laughter] and we're really proud of this 67-foot tall tree that came from the western side of our state. and it had to be cut. it had to be take into a fair building and warmed up so that it could be compressed down to fit on a truck and then it was taken all over the state of wyoming and brought through the rest of the states winding up on georgia on thanksgiving and here the last week so that we could have this grand celebration. today is december 7 and that is a day that lives in infamy so it is only fitting that we mention our service members that might be looking at this on television halfway around the world.

but they also might be in place where is there are not any trees like this. and in some places, they are sticking a snick the ground and taking coat hangers and making limbs and taking things out of the boxes that you sent to them to decorate that tree. on their behalf and on the behalf to have people of wyoming, get to commemorate this tree tonight for wyoming, the west and america. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, senator en zinch. now to help set the proper mood. let me introduce the all city children's choir. they will be singing a medley of holiday songs entitled christmas greetings from wyoming. [applause]

>> ♪ ♪ ♪

>> ♪

>> ♪ >> ♪

>> ♪ >> ♪ >> ♪

>> ♪ [applause] >> the children's chor us from

cheyenne, wyoming. >> ladies and gentlemen, it is now my great pleasure to introduce the speaker of the house. i know this is her favorite event at the capital each year. joining the speaker to light the tree is daniel sitter. come on up. he is a sixth grader from fair view, wyoming. a round for daniel. daniel's name was drawn from more than 1,000 students who made onidenticals for the tree. he won this trip to washington along with the honor of assisting speaker pelosi in lighting the tree. ladies and gentlemen, the speaker of the house, the honorable nancy pelosi. >> hey, we want all of those kids back over here while we light this tree.

come stand in front of this tree. come on over. what an honor it is to be here with all of you and with daniel to be here with senator barraso, senator enzi, congresswoman lummis. the united states navy band. thank you for entertaining us this evening treat for all of us to see the all city children's chorus from cheyenne, wyoming. thank you, you honor o us with your presence and entertain us with your music. it is a joy for us to have you at the cap i accept this for the capital congressman steny hoyer, the majority leader from the house. congresswoman from the senate and the house as well. congressman brown from colorado

springs is with us. you can't see on the other side of the tree but they can see you. gathered on the speaker's gal coin our men and women indown form from walter reid hospital and members of their family. let's give them a wonderful -- i told them that you would appreciate their presence. this is -- the fact that the tree is from wyoming is just such a joy. the light of this magnificent treend its ornaments, we are showcasing the beauty of the equality state for the entire nation to see. last month, as it has been mention the crowd from jackson came together to catch the first glisms of this tree. they snapped photos and took vitt videos. parents brought their children to see the capital christmas

tree as it began its journey to 22 cities within wyoming. 22 cities within wyoming? and towns, before heading across the country. the entire state produced thousands of -- thousands of onidenticals. the tree even has its own memorabilia. mugs and magnets, pins and patches. that you will all want to have. it is a source of pride for wyoming and a source of joy for the united states congress and for all americans. now daniel has been mentioned by sister mya. how old is she? >> she's 13. >> she is here with him as well. zanl the person that we are honorled all of us to share the lighting of this tree with. we're honored by the service of

our me and women in uniform. with the help of daniel sitter, a sixth grader from fairview, wyoming. we are now going to light the tree. i want these children to come closer. you have to be in the picture. this could be on tv. [laughter] you have come this long way. why have a few steps separate you from being in front of the tree. ok, daniel. here you go. you just had better push that up. [applause] >> ♪

>> ♪ [applause] >> well, thank you, daniel and thank you, speaker pelosi.

doesn't the tree look wonderful? well thank you all, everyone, for coming tonight and joining speaker pelosi and members of congress, the wyoming delegation, the forest service, the navy band and other guests for this 47th annual lighting of our united states capital christmas tree. thank you and good night. >> in a few moments, a forum on the federal reserve and the economy. in an hour, president obama's news conference yesterday.

a deal was made with senate republican leaders on extending tax cuts. and "washington journal" with segments on the tax cut deal and segments involving the wikileaks case . now a discussion of the federal reserve and the economy hosts by freedomworks. a group that associated wits the tea party movement. speakers include mike pence and paul ryan. this is an hour. >> welcome, everybody. my name is matt. welcome dwroverpb this joint event sponsored by the freedomworks foundation on sound money on america's global economic leadership. there are so many issues relevant to our economic

recovery. it strikes me that nothing could be more essential to talk about right now than sound money and what happens when we corrupt that role in the economy. one thing you hear consistently again and again from americans both in the election and as they show up across america this that we have to stop spending money we do not have. we have to follow the rules. we have to live within our means. what you have seen over the last three or four years is a substitution of bad fiscal policy for bad monetary policy. it is sort of pouring gasoline on a fire. it is no substitute for

actually living within our means. the tea party from my perspective started in the waning days of the bush administration, most notably the wall street bailout, and the housing bailout before that. and at the time, the treasury secretary got a visit from the chairman of the fed to said, politically that they cannot do this. i need legislation and the treasury department to take the lead on this wall street bailout. fast forward to tim geithner's decision to let the tarp expire. a little decision so that the administration could no longer defend tarp and so they did a back room bailout and the way they could not do politically. and in the most outrageous bailout, we're using the imf and american taxpayer dollars to bail out europe.

the bailouts have to stop. the expansion of monetary policy has to stop. we have to start living within our means and that is what this panel is about. i think that with the new congress, we will see important shifts in the conversation and an opportunity to do things that we could not do before in terms of restoring rationality to monetary and fiscal policy. i like to recognize the president of the atlas economic research foundation. alex is also the founder and president of the hispanic american center for economic research. i first met him at grove city college many years ago. we both had long hair at the time, by the way. [applause] >> thank you so much.

this is an educational foundation in our goal is not to influence in the passing of legislation but elevate the level of discussion and bring the best thinking, the best university center, the economic departments, to give their opinion about how to solve economic problems of the day. we work globally. i attempted to say things about economics but i will not bore you with that. i will just share with you a little of personal experience. we all remembered germany of the past. i come from argentina, live 30 years in argentina and 26 and -- in the united states and i'm a proud american citizen.

i saw how the manipulation of money and credit became an essential element to destroy the rule of law, to corrupt the morals of my native country. i have with me a quote of one of the dictators, juan peron. after he was ousted, the conservatives continued with the same policies that damages so much of the country. so he in a way was teasing the opponents who took him out of power in the revolution of 1956. he wrote this. the federal power that make up a legal body of the central bank turns this institution

into the uncontested regulator almost all the entire economic life of the nation. manipulating exchange rates, foreign exchange, setting income rates and policies, restricting our expanding credit from the comfortable inflexibility of bureaucratic decision making, paperwork, sign that relations, but one can increase or decrease trade with any foreign nation, create money or destroy industry, capitalize are undercapitalized certain activities, promote the building industry or prezive, encourage or discourage the legal structure of the central bank has attributes which openly contradict the constitution of the democratic nation. it allows us to handle all economic life and he called that this institution, almost diabolical in nature.

i get passionate when i speak with this. and confident that it will not happen to the united states. but that alone does not have all the power that the argentine and central bank did, but in conjunction with other parts of the government, it cannot work to the same destruction and weakening of the rule of law. people believe that in order to be successful, they have to be close to those it to the side credit policy and those who give it away parole law begins to deteriorate or have a wonderful set of speakers today. thanks to their work, i am confident the analysis will

-- united states will again regain strong dollar and a currency that deserves the name of constitutional money. thank you all for coming. [applause] >> thank you, alex. next we're privileged to have congressman mike pence. there is a lot i can say about congressman pence. he is a member of the republican leadership. he is a lifelong hoosier. a committed fiscal conservative whom i have never seen waiver from his core conservative values and most importantly, he was that one republican who stood in the breach in the very first days of the wall street debate and said no, i will not compromise on this issue. and at the time it was incredibly unpopular and turned out to be the wisest thing he could of done. congressman mike pence. [applause]

>> thank you, matt kibbe and freedomworks. thank you, atlas economic research foundation. i am not jim demint. if you're consulting program, i'm neither jim demint nor paul ryan. but i am glad to be here. this is an issue with longstanding no leadership that paul ryan has provided, issues of sound money and the proper role of the fed. senator corker, senator demint, and i have joined the battle recently and we're grateful for this forum and the leaders assembled here to have this conversation. but having been invited to come over and pinch hit and be paul's warm-up act, let me share a few basic thoughts and then yield to my betters.

first, we live in no ordinary times. our economy is struggling in the city and on the farm. unemployment is us out -- is a heartbreaking 9.8% nationally. nearly 42 million americans are on food stamps. we have a housing crisis and dismal g.d.p. growth. as we gather today in the belly of the capitol building, it feels more and more to millions of americans that policymakers from capitol hill to the white house to even the central bank know less and less what to do about it. sound money is the very foundation of our prosperity. it must be addressed. before that, let me speak if i can about these times and about growth in general and then i will close in the few minutes that i have with a few thoughts on sound money and the proper role of the fed. with more than 15 million people looking for work, so far

president obama and democrats in congress are trying to borrow and spend the country back to prosperity. the trillion dollar annual deficit, the nearly $14 trillion national debt. they attempted to pass a national energy tax and approve one bailout after another. matt was kind enough to mention that. i helped to lead was an unsuccessful effort to do something other than taking $700 billion from main street and transferring it to wall street. let me say emphatically -- those of us that oppose the wall street bailout did not do so because we thought the policy makers in washington should do nothing. we just thought that was the wrong thing. and we stood firmly on that principle. my belief and my concern when i came out against the wall street paid of was this -- if we passed it, we met

fundamentally change the relationship between our national government and the citizenry in the marketplace. sadly i believe that has occurred. one need look no further than the dodd-frank bill to see that too big to fail now enshrined into law the land. we continue to bail out fannie and freddie to the tune of $150 billion with more expected. and the list goes on, although bailouts, and the like. taxpayer-funded bailout and a substitute for policies that will create real consumer demand and growth. i would submit respectfully that to restore a growing economy, we must end all of this runaway federal spending and go back to the practice of free market policies without apology. the freedom to succeed must include the freedom to fail. the free-market is what made america's economy at the best in the world and we need to be willing to stand on those principles of freedom. even though or economy is

struggling and america seems at a low point, we can restore our economy but it will take courage and a new vision. everything starts with a sound dollar and with fiscal responsibility in washington, d.c. a word on fiscal restraint -- the good news is with the impending majority, there is no shortage of plants -- plans or energy to restore fiscal responsibility to washington, d.c. we have the pledge to america, and over times we have had proposals, blueprints, mr. ryan as a noteworthy road map, toward restoring fiscal discipline to washington, d.c. i co-authored a spending limit amendment to the constitution to have united states. limiting federal spending to 20% -- the constitution except for certain conditions such as

war, believing that that will create a framework in which this and future congresses could live within our means and have incentives to grow the economy. in the midst of all this talk about fiscal discipline, let me say that to grow the economy, we must shrink the size of the federal government. but fiscal discipline alone will not suffice. to bring jobs and pros parity back to america. i think of a similar time in 1977 with margaret thatcher speaking to the economic malaise that set in great britain. of course we're not one to solve our problems by cuts and restraints. it was not restraint but the

start of the industrial revolution, she said. it was not restricted inspired us to explore the north sea. it was incentives, positive, vital, driving, individual incentives. and to that we must repair. what is true in england is true today. for those who would build the cities and, for the frontiers a midamerica most prosperous basis in the history of the world, i submit as i said in the detroit economic club meeting within a week ago, that the new republican majority must embrace of all the economic agenda built on the timeless rhythms of economic freedom. sound monetary policy, which we have gathered about today. tax relief and tax reform. access to american energy, regulatory reform, and trade. that is a start deal i can support. let me close with a few words on monetary policy and then yield to my betters, who have

thought about this more than i have. sound monetary policy is where birth begins. it is the foundation of our prospects. a stronger dollar means a strong america. the american people know that we cannot grow and spend our way back to a growing nation. they sent a deafening message of restraint to washington, d.c., and it does not look like the administration got the message, nor did the federal reserve. in 2008 and 2009, the fed pushed more than one trillion dollars into the federal system to rein in unemployment. yet the national jobless rate has been above 9% for a record time, 18 straight months. the second round of quantitative easing actually seeks inflation in an effort to bring down unemployment. while there is no guarantee this policy will reciprocate succeed in reducing unemployment, the value of the dollar will be diluted. despite promises by mr. bernanke on saturday night that

there was a 100% guarantee against inflation, history teaches otherwise. as economist larry kudlow said, but that can print money but not jobs. i do not lay all the blame solely at the feet of the federal reserve and then i did not come to harshly criticized -- criticize that institution or their well-intentioned efforts. the problem, i believe, but the fed began in 1977 when congress imposed a dual mandate to pursue price stability and maximum employment. too often, this conflicting mandate has caused long-term costs to the economy. q.e. 2 is an example of what happens when it mettles too much. i wonder returned the bed to its original single mandate,

price stability. we joined a longstanding effort of congressman paul ryan in this effort. and we've been criticized by all the right people on this count. but we started the national conversation about the proper role of the fed. i want to take this opportunity to publicly comment paul ryan for his longstanding and lonely leadership on this issue. treasury secretary timothy geithner recently said the administration will oppose any effort to in the dual mandate, saying it was important to keep politics out of monetary policy. let me be clear on this point. speaking for myself and speaking for a broad range of members of congress for whom i have spoken, there no interest among members of congress in eroding the independence of the federal reserve. we recognize the importance of the independence of the central bank. but congress created the dual mandate in 1977, and getting the fed back to its original mission of price stability is precisely how we get politics

out of monetary policy, not the other way around. i submitted this time that the federal reserve focus exclusively on price stability and protecting the dollar. in doing that, we will place the onus for the fiscal policy where it belongs, and that is on either end of pennsylvania avenue. it -- just speaking now as a layman in this area, i have to tell you, we ought to be looking to policy makers to be making decisions that will encourage economic growth and create jobs. we ought not as has been the case since 1977 have the fall back with the fed that can through money supply create conditions that take the pressure off of policy makers on capitol hill that ought to be making the hard choices to put up fiscal house in order in a brace the kind of reforms that will grow the economy increased

opportunities for every american. it is time the federal reserve focused exclusively on price stability. one last point, before i move on, i like to note that in the midst of all that as happened recently, massive government spending, borrowing, quantitative easing in the light, a debate is starting a new over the anger for the global monetary system. my friend the late jack kemp would probably have stopped me before i got out of the room to urge me to this adopt the gold standard here, now. despite press reports to the contrary, i have not done that and do not intend to do so today. but robert zoellich has encouraged us to to rethink that debate over goldeneye agree. about the proper role that it should play in our nation's monetary affairs. with that, as i said, let me yield to my betters, but let me

say that as we gather here today, again, i want to commend atlas and freedomworks. for talking about things that are not foundational in our society. i've been in washington, d.c. for 10 years and too often, it seems that the event horizon that washington, d.c. considers is the next headline, is the next week, it is the next quarter, it is the next year. what we ought to be thinking about is the next generation. how can we once again build american pros parity on the foundation upon which it was originally built. there is nothing that ails the economy that cannot be cured by returning to the time-honored principles of pro-root tax policies, the sound dollar, regulatory reform, access to american energy, and expanded trade. but i will leave one other thought as well. in the midst of these difficult

economic times, as we pursue these timeless and time honored policies that will always create economic growth, let's recognize one more thing -- let's recognize that our present crisis is not just economic and political but moral in nature. any observer in these times in which we live should recognize that people in positions of all authority, from wall street to washington, d.c., have walked away from the timeless principles of honesty and integrity, an honest day's work for an honest day's pay, and the simple notion that you ought to treat other person the way that you want to be treated. the truth is we have to get back to basics. public policy alone will not cure what ails the american economy and restore american economic greatness. it will take public virtue. it was on the foundation of character of this

nation that our bounds prosperity was created. as we consider policies to strengthen the market place, let us also repair and strengthen those institutions, traditional family and organized religion, that nurture the character of the nation. forif the foundations crumb -- for if the foundations crumble, then how can the nation stand? thank you very much. it is an honor to address you today and i appreciate the opportunity. [applause] >> thank you, congressman. nextel like to introduce dr. judy shelton, who is from my perspective, one of the best monetary economist in the world today discussing sound monetary policy, was the unique ability to translate complex ideas into crystal clarity. she is the co-director of the sound money project of the atlas economic research foundation, and also the author of numerous books and articles, including "the coming soviet

crash," "money meltdown," and articles that you would see regularly in the "washington journal" -- "wall street journal" and "new york times. she will talk about this and we're honored to get that out to the rest of america where it belongs. most recently, judy has joined freedomworks as a senior fellow, and director of monetary policy at freedomworks foundation. dr. judy shelton. [applause] >> thank you, matt. sound money is one of those phrases that sounds good, it sounds right, the sound of the dollar, but what does it really mean to be in favor of sound an honest money?

in my days as a university professor, and i taught a course called money and banking and graduate course on international finance. to teach anything, you have to go back to basics, to the fundamentals of what you are talking about. when we talk about money, we need to focus on those primary functions of money that you were all taught in your economics course at college. money is meant to provide a measure of value, a reference point. it is like a ruler. we all may build different houses but we use the measure. this is a foot. this is a yard, to plan the height of the walls and the breadth of the rooms. it is a common remps point that measured the standard when applied to money that allows perfect strangers, buyers and sellers to convey to each other the value of what they bring to marketplace or what they seek

from the marketplace, because money is the medium, the measuring stick to which you set a price, and price conveys value. it is the whole reason free markets work, free markets calibrate supply and demand based on price and the price is expressed through the money. the monetary standard. so the standard has to be meaningful, it has to be accurate, so that all market participants understand the value of goods and services, and that enables them to make offer more choices, which enables free markets to deliver optimal economic outcomes, which lets whole societies by delivering maximum levels of success. the soundness of the money is a critical factor if you want a free-market economy to

work. the primary functions of money, to serve as a medium of exchange, the unit of account, and the store of value, all arise as a result of people needing it this on a an accurate measure to convey those price signals so they can engage in commerce with each other, so they can bring to the marketplace whatever their talents and energy and creativity can offer, and reach their maximum potential toward achieving their dreams, whatever they are. it is called economic freedom. entrepreneurs are the enrichers of society. they deserve sound money. they need that stable foundation to make the plans to build that product or develop that service so they can achieve their own aspirations and benefit society in the process.

sounds a lot like what adam smith had in mind. but the invisible hand cannot function properly to maximize economic opportunities and deliver maximum prosperity it the money does not provide an accurate unit of account and a reliable store of value. which brings us to the core principles of sound money. you will find them in the back of this guide, which is being made available today as a joint project of the atlas economic research foundation in freedomworks. 100,000 copies are being distributed in the initial run because we want people to understand that money, sound money, should be seen as a fundamental right of a free people. the integrity of money should be upheld as a vital element of free markets and not be compromised to serve as an instrument of government policy. if you had your guide, you can

follow along, but these are the core principles of sound money. money should serve as an honest measure and a reliable store of value. money should convey price signals with clarity so that free markets can operate efficiently. when price signals are distorted through loose monetary policy, economic resources are misallocated and financial capital is misdirected. sound money forges a link between effort and reward by providing a dependable store of value over time. otherwise, why should anyone save money? inflation, even low inflation, makes suckers out of savers. money has to be trustworthy so individuals can plan ahead with confidence. remember, money's most important function is to provide a useful tool for private enterprise, not to serve as an instrument of

government policy. the founder specifically limited the money powers granted to government to prevent abuse to that authority, to prevent debasement of the currency, they were well aware that currency debasement is one of the oldest forms of tyranny against citizens. and now, it is a special privilege for me to introduce the man who is here to help remind us of the views of an individual quoted in this guide, jack kemp, an american statesman, an economic conservative, was a champion of sound money and an honest dollar, and i would like to invite jimmy kemp, who heads up the jack kemp foundation, to say a few words about his father's ideals. jimmy?

[applause] >> thank you, judy. after the success of kemp ross in in the 8 1, monetary policy and addressing the soundness of the dollar was the next task on his list. it never got finished in his time, but as the head of the jack kemp foundation, whose goal is to develop and engage exceptional leaders, one of the rules of engagement is on critical issues. our monetary policy seasoned soundness of the dollar is certainly one of the key sthause may dad cared about deeply and believed was the foundation not to just live within our means, which i agree, people want our government to live within our

means and dad appreciated that and what dad got and each of us understand is we don't just want to live within our means, we want to grow into greater means and you can't do that without a sound dollar. i got sick and tired of hearing my dad talk about a dollar is as good as gold. nobody else would listen to him. he would talk to me because i was the only one around. he would talk to the wall about this if he had to. the debate was taking place. thoonk congressman paul ryan, mike pence, freedomworks, atlas, and so many other people, we need to engage this discussion and the jack kemp foundation looks forward to being a part of that discussion and fostering a real engagement in the civil ideas we have a

great leadership that embodies this. mike pence and paul ryan who respect theired a versares who don't see them -- adversaries who don't see them as enemies. it is as honor to be here and to be able to channel with enthusiasm and he would have been much more involved than actual issues that i am but it is just an honor to be here and to see the debate going on and judy, thank you so much for including me and thank you all for being here. [applause] >> thanks, jimmy. now let me close my remarks and say it is the moral of the mention of money, the idea of trust and the idea of having this stable foundation to build a free society based on

personal responsibility and individual economic freedom, that is crux of free market capitalism. nobody puts aside capital and sacrifices consumption as to to have financial feed corn for the future if they don't believe in a greater future harvest. capitalism and free enterprise is an expression of faith in the future, which itself, is a moral outlook. there are all kinds of economic reasons to insist on sound money to achieve optimal economic outcomeses, maximum pros parity, things i discussed, but in the end, the call for honest money is more important. reread that you shall have a perfect and just measure. so that your days may be lengthened and the land in which your lord or god that is given you. you know, every bank note,

every coin issued by the u.s. government, has engraved on it "in god we trust." that should be a very sobering reminder that we should never take our money or this great american experiment in self-rule for accountable government, for granted. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, judy. next up, i would like to introduce congressman paul ryan. paul what is dick army would call a legislative entrepreneur. he was a one-man think tank, which they used to call dick army as well. most important to me, perhaps is that paul ryan will be the next john casic. i think paul knows what that means. john casik was the chairman to

budget committee in the days leading up to the republican revolution of 1994 and we would all point to casik as the -- the disciplinarian, the guy who said no to his own leadership when it came to questions of living within a budget, and we expect paul to be that -- to have continued source of new ideas as we tackle all of these problems. paul ryan. [applause] >> thank you so much, matt. first of all, it is great to see a lot of old friends here. i was raised on these issues by jack kemp, judy shelton. i guess we're all getting the band back together, is what's happening here. this is probably the best 25