[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> the house debates rules for the upcoming health care repeal debate. then president obama talks about the latest unemployment figures and announces new members of his economic team. then another chance to see chairman ben bernanke testifying before the senate budget committee. >> this weekend on c-span3 " american history tv," live coverage of the american historical society. a round table on national security and the public's need to know. as the congressional black -- black caucus mark spitz anniversary. charles rangel on the career. then more about the history of u.s. currency. see the complete we can schedule online at c-span.org.

you can also press the c-span alert button and have the schedules e-mail it to you. >> the house begins debate on a bill to repeal the health care law. this was on the rules for that debate which allows seven hours of debate and one opportunity to change the bill before the final vote scheduled to take place wednesday. this is about an hour and 15 minutes. honor for me for the first time in four years to say that for the purpose of debate only i yield the customary 30 minutes to my very good friend and rules committee colleague, the the gentlelady from rochester, new york, ms. slaughter. pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. dreier: during consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to rise and extend which

i have done. and i ask all members have five lemming days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: madam speaker, house resolution 26 provides for a closed rule for consideration of h.r. 2 and self-executes an amendment by the majority leader which is required under the statutory pay-as-you-go act of 2010. this is routinely required and is similar to many provisions that have been self-executed since the enactment of statutory pay-go. the resolution provides for seven hours of debate on h.r. 2, equally and controlled by the chair and ranking member of six committees and the majority leader and minority leader. it also provides the minority a motion to recommit, h.r. 2, with or without instructions. house resolution 26 provides for consideration of h.res. 9, under a structured rule, that provides an hour of debate and makes in order an amendment if offered by representative matheson of utah. it also provides for one motion to recommit h.res. 9 without instructions. lastly, the rule provides for

the consideration of a resolution if offered by the majority leader or his designee relating to the status of certain actions taken by members-elect under a closed rule. madam speaker, it was just before midnight that my great new colleague, and i were here in this chamber and filed this rule following a lengthy 12-hour hearing upstairs in the rules committee. i have to say that there were many, many discussions that took place on a wide range of issues. i think it's very important for us to note that there were those who argued that we should not be taking up this issue because of the fact that we should be focusing on job creation and economic growth. madam speaker, we know that the overwhelming message that came from the american people is that we have to get our economy back on track. we have to create jobs. we have to make sure that those people who are struggling to get

under the first rung of the economic ladder are able to do just that. and that's why when we look at a $2.7 trillion expansion of the federal government, $2.7 trillion in new spending, we recognize something that is common sense and that is if you're going to expand the size and scope and reach of the federal government by that magnitude, it clearly is going to kill the effort to create jobs and get our economy back on track. so that's why today, madam speaker, we are taking the first step in fulfilling a key promise that we have made to the american people. with this rule we are setting in motion an effort to repeal president obama's job-killing health care bill and replace it with real solutions. i underscore that again because all the attention is focused on

the fact that we are going to be trying to kill good provisions that are out there. madam speaker, we want to start with a clean slate. we are going to repeal president obama's job-killing health care bill and replace it with real solutions. this rule takes two important steps. the first is to allow for consideration of a bill to hit the reset button, so to speak, on the very damaging legislation that was passed last year under the guise of health care reform. the second is a resolution directing each of the committees of jurisdiction to craft responsible, effective, and economically viable health care solutions. madam speaker, the resolution lays out very clearly what real reform looks like. real reform will help not hinder in our goal towards creating jobs. real reform will lower health care premiums by enhancing

competition and patient choice. it will preserve the right of patients to keep their existing coverage. if they so choose. it will ensure access to quality care for those suffering from pre-existing conditions. it will implement meaningful lawsuit abuse reform so that resources can go to patients and doctors. and not to trial lawyers. in short, it will increase access to health care for all americans without compromising quality or hurting the very important small business sector of our nation's economy. madam speaker, the underlying re place resolution which i have offered will begin a robust committee process to tackle the difficult but essential work of achieving these goals and crafting true reform for the american people. this will be a process in which each and every member, each and every member, democrat and

republican alike, will have an opportunity to participate. madam speaker, as speaker boehner said, the day before yesterday when he accepted the gavel, we are returning to regular order. once again our committees will be the laboratories, the centers of expertise, that they were intended to be. rank-and-file members of both parties will play an active role in crafting legislation, scrutinizing proposals, offering amendments, participating in real debate. critical legislation is not going to be written behind closed doors by a select few. today's rule sets in motion a process that will be both transparent and collaborative. but we cannot get to that very important step without clearing the first hurdle. which is to undo the damage that has already been done. we will hear people say, why are you considering this under a

closed rule? madam speaker, this was a clear promise that was made throughout last year leading up to the very important november 2 election. everyone acknowledges the elections have consequences. the commitment was made that we would have an up or down vote on repeal. and that's exactly what we are doing. we must repeal last year's bill before we proceed with replacement. just as prekicted -- predicted, the so-called reform bill is having very real negative consequences for our economy and our job market. it is putting enormous burdens on job creators, particularly small businesses, at a time that is already one of the most difficult we have faced. imposing significant new burdens and penalties, while our employment rate remains above 9%. we got the news a few minutes ago it's at 9.3%. we are encouraged by that

positive drop but only 105,000 jobs were created, not the 150,000 jobs necessary to be created to sustain the position we are in right now. so we still are dealing with very, very serious economic challenges. and that's why we need to take a commonsense approach to first repeal this measure and then deal with solutions. above all, i will say that the onerous, unworkable mandates that have been imposed are adding greater uncertainty which are job creation's biggest enemy. anyone who has spent any time talking with small business owners knows this to be the case. while the economic impact is already quite apparent, the fiscal consequences are looming down the road. while the bill's authors used a host of accounting gimmicks, i'm going to get into those further as i'm sure i will be challenged on this and i look forward to talking about the accounting

gimmicks that have been utilized, by the authors used a host of accounting gimmicks, as i said, to mask the true cost of this measure, and honest and realistic assessment of the impact on the deficit shows a much clearer and tragically a far worse picture. the budget committee has demonstrated the real cost of the health care bill, as i said, in my open, a staggering $2.7 trillion. once it is fully implemented. it will add over $700 billion to our deficit in the first 10 years. the words reckless and unsustainable hardly begin to cover it. this bill is an economic and fiscal disaster of unprecedented proportions. the time to undo it before anymore damage is done is quickly running out. republicans promised the american people we would act

swiftly and decisively, and that's exactly what we are doing. some of my friends on the other side of the aisle have asked, why there will be no amendments to the repeal bill? frankly, there is nothing to amendment. there is nothing to amend, madam speaker, the repeal bill. either we are going to wipe the slate clean and start fresh or we are not. that's not to say there aren't some good provisions in this measure. that is so onerous, nearly 3,000 pages, that we believe that the best way to do this is to wipe the slate clean, have an open and transparent process, and do everything we can to ensure that every single american has access to quality health care and health care insurance. now, once that slate is completely wiped clean, we will be ready for this open and

collaborative process to develop the real solutions that we have talked about. that's what we promised the american people as we led up to last november 2, and that's exactly what we will deliver here today. madam speaker, first we undo the damage, then we work together to implement real reform and real solutions. i urge my colleagues to support this rule and then, after we have gone through the three-day layover requirement next week, which is in compliance with another promise that we made to the american people, i urge my colleagues to support the underlying legislation, h.r. 2, which our colleague, the new majority leader, mr. cantor has offered, and h.res. 9, which i have introduced, that calls for our committees to work in a bipartisan way to develop solutions to the challenges that we have out there in ensuring that every american has access to quality health care. with that i reserve the balance

of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: good morning, madam speaker. i appreciate my gentleman friend, mr. dreier, for yielding me time and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. slaughter: what a week it's been. since we've been sworn in, the republican broken promises have been dizzying. one summed up the week up nicely when he said, quote, i don't think it would be possible to fall from grace any faster than this end quote. in november, the republican leadership, led by speaker boehner, traveled to suburban virginia and made a pledge to america. their constituents, including tea party patriots, like mr. mecker, listened intently as the republican party pledged to be fiscally responsible and serve the will of the american

people. on page 6 of the republican pledge to america, the party states, and i quote, with commonsense exceptions for seniors, veterans and our troops, we will roll back government spending to prestimulus, prebailout levels saving us at least $100 billion in the first year alone and putting us on a path to balance the budget and pay down the debt, end quote. the pledge was solemnly made by republican leadership despite being largely panned as a political stunt. despite following through on their pledge, the republican majority said the pledge to cut $100 billion was hypothetical. today now we're moving forward to do the exact opposite of the actions that they pledged as they introduce legislation to repeal the affordable care act. if successful, the republican legislation will add $230 billion to the deficit by 2021.

this extra $230 billion won't be spent rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, teaching our children or providing for the millions without jobs. instead, the $230 billion will be added to our deficit in order to take health care benefits and protections from those who need them the most. for example, starting this year the affordable health care act will begin to close the doughnut hole for seniors. under the law medicare beneficiaries who fall in the doughnut hole will be eligible for a 50% discount on covered brand-name prescription drugs. repeal this law and seniors receive no help and will be forced to pay their rising costs alone. those are the types of protections i fight for today. fiscally, members of congress pace a $300 billion choice. according to the congressional budget office, we have two options. one, do we keep the affordable

health care act and save $130 billion by 2021 or, two, do we repeal the affordable health care act and add $200 billion to our deficit by 2021? that may be trouble for some but for most of us it's easy. for me the answer is clear and i assume to most americans it's clear as well. because they can't win by simply judging apples to apples, the republican leadership has taken to discrediting the congressional budget office. yet, a quit bit of research will reveal that republicans have long valued the nonpartisan and reliable work of the congressional budget office and have publicly supported the agency before. in fact, 2009, speaker boehner repeatedly referred to the c.b.o. as nonpartisan institution and relied on their estimates to argue against the affordable care act at the time. but now that the c.b.o.'s estimates are detrimental to

their political goals, they have taken to questioning the work. republican senator john cornyn said it's inconvenient. two years ago he said, i quote, i believe the professionals at the c.b.o. are doing a difficult but unpopular work. they are speaking the truth to power here in washington, and making the folks who would pass these enormous unfunded bills that impose a huge debt on generations hereafter somewhat unhappy. but i think they're doing important service by telling us the facts. and last week, i commended the director of the c.b.o. for saying that the c.b.o. will never adjust our views to make people happy. thank you, doctor. god bless him for his integrity and commitment for telling the truth because we have to learn how to deal with the truth, not try to remake it or try to cover it up. now, i couldn't agree more with

that. the deficit estimates provided by the c.b.o. are the singular authoritative figuring from which we make all our decisions and have for decades. even if some don't like what the numbers tell us we know that numbers don't lie. i remind my colleagues that today's actions are not, quote, hypothetical, unquote. we truly face a $300 billion choice. we can choose to provide invaluable benefits to millions of americans while paying down our national deficit. remember that it will save $134 billion over 10 years, or end health care choices for millions and add $230 billion to the nation's deficit. mr. speaker -- madam speaker, we are considering the first measure from the rules committee of this new congress, and my republican friends have already produced one for the record books. let me give you some of the highlights. first of all, the resolution includes a completely closed

process for two separate pieces of legislation. that means we get two closed rules in one. and maybe my republican friends think they can save taxpayers money by rolling all the closed rules into a single resolution. i think that's what they meant by bringing efficiency to government. the first closed rowley on the health care bill -- rule on the health care bill does heavy lifting. blocks every single germane amendment submitted to the rules committee. that's not exactly right. it slips in one change without allowing the house to vote on it. the special amendments slipped in with the famous demon pass maneuver is very interesting. it allows the house to pretend that the repeal bill is free even though the budget office says it will raise the deficit by over $1 trillion. that's a neat trick, and now we know the secret weapon for reducing the deficit, a blindfold. this closed process is especially troubling on the health care repeal because this republican bill has had no

public hearing, no committee consideration and is not paid for. the second closed rule in this two for one package blocks all amendments to another resolution, to correct a flaw in the swearing in process. apparently the vice chairman of the rules committee was conducting legislative business before he was actually a member of congress. maybe amendments are not important here because no member in the house has seen this resolution. since the rule allows the majority leader to make the changes -- allows the majority leader to make changes until the moment it is introduced. if my colleagues are concerned about not having enough time to read this surprised resolution, don't worry. the rule allows the house to debate it for four full minutes. four minutes? have you ever heard of a bill debated for four minutes? fortunately, the rule generously gives the minority two of those four minutes and i guess that qualifies as both efficiency and bipartisanship. finally, the rule allows the house to consider a sweeping press release from the

republican leadership, a resolution to replace real patient protection with vague rhetoric. and, mr. speaker, this is a very disappointing day for the house rules committee. the first action in this new congress violates the promise we heard from our republican friends, no public consideration, a completely closed process, legislative text no member has read, four minutes of debate on an important constitutional issue and so on. for all those members who were sent to washington like i was to repair our nation's finances, create jobs for millions of the unemployed, help the millions of americans in need, the decision should be simple. i encourage my colleagues to reject the efforts of the republican leadership, keep our promises to our constituents and vote to keep the affordable health care law, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i yield myself 10 seconds to say

that thomas jefferson said the two thinking people can be given the exact same set of facts and draw different conclusions. well, i just heard what my friend from rochester said. i will say this is a great day for the people's house because we are going to in fact be implementing the commitment that was made to focus on getting our economy back on track. with that, madam speaker, i yield two minutes to have very hardworking and thoughtful member of the rules committee who was with us for 12 hours up until late last night, our new colleague from north charleston, south carolina, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. scott: thank you, madam speaker. mr. chairman, i will say that it's truly an honor to serve on the rules committee. my first experience at the 12th hour experience all day yesterday. what an opportunity to serve the american people. thank you, sir. this is a great opportunity for all of us in america, to kill the job-killing health care bill that is taking jobs away

from the private sector. soon we want to make six quick points. we all recognize that the cost of insurance is only going up, up and up. there is a misnoemer that this bill somehow reduces the cost of insurance. it is simply categorically not true. shifting who pays for the insurance, the health care cost, does not make the health care cost goes down. it is simply going to continue to rise. second point, when you design a bill that has tax increase after tax increase after tax increase and say that you are reducing the deficit by increasing taxes, it is inconsistent with the reality that the american people want from their congress. third, the individual mandate is simply unconstitutional, and if the individual mandate is not part of the bill, if we don't force every single american to buy insurance, this ponzi scheme simply doesn't work. number four, bringing 10 years of revenue in and paying out

six years of benefits and calling that equal, that's a farce. number five, the lifetime benefits -- lifetime benefits, we want everybody in america to have access to health care without any question. the question we ask ourselves is from an actuarial perspective, can we pay for a $2.7 trillion expansion, a new entitlement when we have a $76 trillion unfunded liability on the current entitlements? we simply cannot continue to dig a hole and call ourself compassionate. there is nothing compassionate about increasing our entitlements by jeopardizing the future entitlements of americans. and finally, we've heard lots of rhetoric. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i'd like to yield my friend an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 second. mr. scott: finally, we heard

lots of rhetoric of what we're doing to senior citizens and women. what we are facing is an opportunity to stop robbing future generations, to stop the unnecessary impact -- the intergenerational cost without even taking into consideration the intergenerational cost, we consistently impact unborn americans with legislation that passed under the former house. it is good to be in the house with a brand new speaker and thank you, mr. chairman, for allowing me to be part of the rules committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for three minutes. mr. mcgovern: madam speaker, the american people made it very clear in the last election, that they want us to focus on one thing, jobs. but the new republican majority has instead chosen to reopen an old ideological battle. i think that's a mistake. but the good news is that the american people will have the

opportunity right at the outset of this new congress to see the clear differences between democrats and republicans. democrats believe that insurance companies should be prohibited from discriminating under the basis of pre-existing conditions. republicans do not. democrats believe we should close the doughnut hole and reduce prescription drug prices for our seniors. republicans do not. democrats believe that young people should be allowed to remain on their parent's insurance plan until age 26. republicans do not. democrats believe we should provide tax breaks to small businesses and subsidies to low-income americans to help them pay for health insurance for their workers and their families. republicans do not. and democrats believe that we need to seriously address the budget deficit. republicans do not. as the c.b.o. croble made abundantly clear -- made abundantly clear. it would add $230 billion to the deficit over the next 10 years and another $1.2 trillion in the following 10 years.

as far as i can tell, this is the most expensive one-page bill in american history. 114 words. that's $2 billion per word. rather than address those budgetary facts, the new republican majority has simply ignored them, to cover their ears and pretend that the laws of arithmetic do not apply to them. in their first order of legislative business, the republicans want to take health insurance reform and toss it in the trash. and how many hearings have they held on the impact of this repeal? zero. how many markups do they have? zero. and most shockingly, how many amendments will they consider in this bill? zero. the new majority whip, mr. mccarthy, said after the election last november, and i quote, when you look at the pledge to america that the republicans have laid out, there is a cultural change in there. there is something that opens up the floor that hasn't been done for quite sometime where bills will be written in the back room, where bills actually

have an open rule, where people can bring up amendments on the floor. so much for that. instead of thoughtful, reasonable legislative language that addresses health care issues, the republicans replaced part of their repeal strategy is just a list of happy talk sound bites. it's no more than a press release. so, again, madam speaker, i believe we should be focusing on jobs and the economy and in the meantime i urge my colleagues to reject this rule and the underlying reckless bill. i yield back the balance of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: we have 87 new republicans in the house of representatives. there's no more impressive group than the four serving with us on the house rules committee. among them former sheriff noon gent -- nugent, the gentleman from brooksville, florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. nugent: thank you, adam -- madam speaker. it's new to me.

chairman, thank you so very much. we were there last night in the rules committee for 12 hours to hear testimony from a number of individuals. on the democratic side and also on the republican side. let me talk to you about this. over the past year i met with thousands of people from throughout florida's fifth congressional district. whether they be small business owners, veterans, or medicare recipients, they ask me to promise, promise to repeal obamacare. it's clear that the american people know more than our democratic leadership in regards to what americans want. obamacare eliminates millions of american jobs. cuts hundreds of millions of dollars from medicare. taxes by almost $500 billion over 10 years for six years' worth of coverage. everybody knows that the health care system's broken and that reform is needed.

however the unconstitutional job-killing mandates of obamacare are not the answer. house resolution 9 is an important step in congress working with the american public to find real, meaningful solutions to our nation's health care needs. this is the people's house and we should be listening to the people. house resolution 9 will allow us to foster economic growth, job creation, lower health care premiums, and protect medicare. and inform the medical malpractice system that is bankrupting america. for all these reasons i am grateful for my colleague from california, mr. dreier, for introducing house resolution 9 and i'm proud to be an original co-sponsor of that resolution. with that, i yield back the

balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from colorado, a member of the rules committee, mr. polis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized for two minutes. mr. polis: i thank the chair. i rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill, the most expensive one-page bill in the history of congress and it costs the taxpayers over $200 billion first 10 years alone and over $1 trillion. not only have the republicans as the first bill that we are doing a rule on and facing here on the floor put forward the most expensive one-page bill in the history of congress, but it is not paid for, madam speaker. in addition to not being paid for they have waived many of the notice fors transparency requirements, the regular order that they sought to establish with regard to the way that this congress is run. madam speaker, there were many good ideas and good amendments brought forward by members of

both parties yesterday during our session of the rules committee. i want to talk about a few in particular. one, my colleague from michigan, gary peters, brought a proposal that would have made sure that this biggest one-page expenditure in the history of congress did not raise taxes on small businesses. unfortunately that amendment is not made in order under this rule and therefore h.r. 2 will be raising taxes on small businesses across the country that are now receiving tax credits for providing health care for their employees. there was also a lot of discussion and i think it's important and the american people know with regard to people with pre-existing conditions. now, we all want to do something for people with pre-existing conditions. there was talk yesterday, in fact when we are talking about h.r. 9, there might be discussion in the future with regard to agreeing on high-risk pools for people with pre-existing conditions, but what this body is being asked to do today and next week is effectively replace something that works for people with pre-existing conditions, namely

eliminating prices discriminations with some vague assurance on paper that perhaps someday, some committees, some chairmen might consider. we asked them kindly to consider something that would do something for people with pre-existing conditions. well, madam speaker, that is simply not enough for the people that have pre-existing conditions today, for those who will in the future. if we want to talk about improving health care there's ample room to do it but not eliminating protection that is exist. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm very privileged to yield three minutes to the distinguished former chairman of the republican conference, my friend from columbus, indiana, mr. pence. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for three minutes. mr. pence: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i would ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pence: thank you, madam speaker. i rise in support of the rule but i rise from my heart with a deep sense of gratitude to the american people. to urge my colleagues in both parties to join us as we keep

our promise to the american people and next week vote to repeal their government takeover of health care, lock, sew stock -- stock, and barrel. i know democrats said at the time that they had made history. i said at the time i thought we broke with history. we broke with some of our finest traditions, limited government, personal responsibility, and most profoundly the consent of the governed. on a late sunday night in march, the last majority had their stay . on a tuesday in november the american people had their say. and that brings us to this moment. it is remarkable to hear members in the minority explaining their opposition to this bill. only in washington, d.c., a year ago, only in washington, d.c., could you say you were going to spend trillions of dollars and save people money, and this morning only in washington,

d.c., could you say that repealing a $2.7 trillion government takeover of health care is actually going to cost money. pleased to yield. mr. dreier: i thank my friend for yielding. i wonder if he might repeat that line. i think he said only in washington, d.c., can there be interpretation that cutting $2.7 trillion in spending is actually going to end up costing the american people, is that what the gentleman was saying? i thank my friend for yielding. mr. pence: i thank the gentleman. reclaiming my time. yes. it must be mystifying for people looking in this morning to hear about the most expensive one-page bill in american history. i say again, only in washington, d.c., could a congress vote to repeal a $2.67 trillion -- $2.7 trillion government takeover of health care and the minority says it will cost the american people money.

let me explain, when you mandate that every american buy government-approved insurance whether they want it or need it or not, when you create a government-run plan paid for with job-killing tax increases, when you provide public funding for abortion for the first time in american history, that's a government takeover of health care that violates the principles, the ideals, and the values of millions of americans and the american people know it. look, after we repeal obamacare next week, we can start over. with commonsense reforms that will focus on lowering the cost of health insurance without growing the size of government. republicans will waste no time in bringing greater freedoms to the american people, to purchase health insurance the way they buy life insurance, the way they buy car insurance. we'll deal with responsible litigation reform. we'll even use the savings to cover pre-existing conditions. i urge my colleagues to join me in support of this rule but join us as we keep our promise to the american people and repeal their

government takeover of health care once and for all. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, this is not a dispute between republicans and democrats about the $1.3 trillion. c.b.o., the nonpartisan congressional budget office, is saying that. i will now yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. matsui. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for two minutes. ms. matsui: i thank the gentlelady for yielding me time. madam speaker, i rise in strong opposition to the rule and the bill before us. the bill would increase the national deficit by $230 billion. increase costs to individuals, families, and small business owners, and deny the american public the consumer protections they have been seeking for years. repeal of the health care law would also mean the young adults would not be able to stay under a parents' plan. this is something that would have a devastating effect on constituents of mine such as

elizabeth. shortly after graduating college she was dropped from her parents' plan and soon developed a severe thyroid condition. as a result, she had to purchase her own individual insurance plan which proved to be a severe financial hardship for her and her parents. thankfully she was able to re-enroll on her parents' plan as of january 1 because of this health reform bill. repeal would also mean that senior citizens of sacramento would not see any relief for the medicare part d doughnut hole. the bill would close the doughnut hole critical to seniors in my districts. one such senior regularly pays over $2,000 a month for his prescription drugs. repeal would mean gary and the thousands of other seniors in my district would see no relief from the part d doughnut hole. this is unacceptable. madam speaker, a vote against this rule and against this bill is a vote to protect the american public from unfair insurance company practices. to provide relief to young and

old alike, and to stay on the path to fiscal responsible future. i urge my colleagues to vote down this rule and vote against the underlying legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield one minute to a hardworking member of the energy and commerce committee which will be one of those committees when we pass h.res. 9 that will be dealing with ensuring that every single american has access to quality health insurance. our friend from brentwood, tennessee, mrs. blackburn. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam speaker. today we do begin a very important process and it is a solid first step. and i stand to support this rule and to support repeal of this law because we have on the law -- on the books a law that doesn't improve the quality of health care. it will not reduce the cost of

health care. and it is going to add billions to the exploding national debt. we have listened to the american people. they are smart. and they know that this law is unworkable. it won't deliver on the promises that they made. and the american people voted in overwhelming numbers to repeal it and replace it. that is the action that we are going to take. congress cannot wait any longer to get this irresponsible law out of our doctors' offices, out of our lives, and off the books. we in tennessee have lived through the experiment of government-run health care called tenn-care. tennessee could not afford it and the american people know this nation cannot afford a tenn-care-type program on a national level. i support the rule. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, our ranking member of ways and means, mr. levin.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: this is what the republicans are after, what their repeal would mean. it would take away from millions of americans, coverage for kids with pre-existing conditions, coverage for young adults under 26, recommended preventive care would be taken away, it would take away lower drug costs for seniors. and this is what the republican repeal would do. it would give back to insurance companies unreasonable premium increases, unjust policy termses, rescissions, it would take away this, it would give back profits and c.e.o. salaries

to insurance companies, not health care benefits. it will give back annual and lifetime limits on benefits. it gives back to insurance companies discrimination author against women. these are concrete reasons to vote no on this repeal. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i yield to a member of the energy and commerce committee, our friend from marietta, georgia, dr. gingrey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minutes. mr. gingrey: madam speaker, i thank the gentleman for yielding. we have heard a lot of arguments on the other side of the aisle in regard to the $230 billion cost. and on our side of the aisle of course only in america can something actually cost $1.15

trillion in eliminating it that all of a sudden costs $230 billion. yes, ms. slaughter, only in america, only in this congress, numbers do lie. let me just say that what we have been talking about on this side of the aisle, of course, is the voice of american people. it's about 3,000 years ago that a little shepard boy walked into that valley of death looking up at all those philistines and that nine-foot giant goliath who had that coat of maile, sword, and javelin, what did david have? a pouch and handful of stones. he hit that giant right between the head, brought him to his knees, and cut off the head of the snake. that pouch and those little pebbles represent the voice of the american people. that's what we have on this side of the aisle. that's why we are going to pass h.res. 9 and we are going to pass h.r. 2 next week and we are going to deliver our promise to the american people to

eliminate, to repeal obamacare, the american people spoke loudly. they don't like this bill. the democratic majority in the senate and the president have one last chance to make amends. i think they'll do it. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia yields back. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. markey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one minute. mr. markey: this debate is about health care versus don't care. the democrats' health care law lowers prescription drug costs, helps middle-class families pay for coverage for their sick children and expands health care for 32 million more americans, reducing the deficit by $143 billion. the democrats' health care law helps grandma afford her prescription drugs. the republicans don't care

about grandma. they want to take back the drug benefits in the new law. g.o.p. used to stand for grand old party. now it stands for grandma's out of prescriptions. the republicans don't care repeal shows they don't care about sick children with medical bills, pushing families into bankruptcy. they don't care about grandma and grandpa who need help paying for prescription drugs. vote down this rule so that we can help grandma, sick children and middle-class families struggling to pay for health care. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this point i'm happy to yield one minute to a hardworking member of this freshman class, the gentleman from san antonio, mr. canseco. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. canseco: madam speaker, i

rise today in support of the rule and in support of an underlying legislation, the repealing of the job-killing health care act. 10 months ago president obama and his allies in the democrat-controlled house and senate committed legislative malpractice when they jammed through the congress and into the law a washington takeover of health care. they did so despite the overwhelming opposition of the american people. since its enactment into law, what was already an unpopular law has only continued to become more unpopular. there's no doubt that we need to reform health care in america. however, it's not done by assaulting individual liberties guaranteed in our constitution, bankrupting our children and grandchildren and putting washington bureaucrats and personal relationships between our doctors and our patients. repealing the health care bill will also help encourage job growth to get our economy back on track.

our economy's not suffering from a capital crisis. it is suffering from a confidence crisis. mr. chairman, may i -- mr. dreier: madam speaker, i'm happy to yield my friend an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. canseco: thank you. policies enacted in washington like the health care bill have injected uncertainty into our economy that has eroded the confidence of americans to start new businesses or expand current ones to create jobs. the american people have made it clear, they want the health care law repealed and replaced with commonsense alternatives that will lower the cost of health care while also increasing quality and access. after meeting and speaking with thousands of texans in the 23rd district over the past year, this is their message. repealing and replacing the health care bill is one of the promises made to america in the pledge to america.

today we are working on that promise as we work to -- the speaker pro tempore: the time has expired. mr. canseco: thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: i yield one minute to the gentleman from nouge, mr. pallone. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. pallone: thank you, madam speaker. this is nothing but a gag rule. i and so many of my colleagues on the krattic side went up to the rules committee yesterday and asked for amendments and they were almost all excluded from this rule. the republican chairman of the committee says there's transparency. he says that there's an opportunity for participation. he can say it as many times as he wants but it's simply not true. he also said this is a commitment to the american people. there's no commitment to the american people here. the only commitment is to the insurance companies. they're the only ones that are going to gain from repeal of this important legislation because they want to increase premiums and they want to institute discriminatory practices again against women,

against men. against those who have breast cancer, or bring back those annual caps or lifetime caps if they have a serious operation and they try to go back again and they don't have insurance. or perhaps the child who's up to 26 and also will not be able to get on their parent's insurance policy again. so let me tell you here. the only one that benefits is the insurance company, not the american people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: may i inquire of my friend on the other side of the aisle how many speakers she has remaining? ms. slaughter: certainly, madam speaker. we have -- we've got every minute taken. i'm not sure everybody is going to show up. mr. dreier: i'm told 11 minutes are remaining on your side. i think with that i reserve the balance of our time. ms. slaughter: all right. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to

yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, the dean of the house and our leader on health care, mr. dingell. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from the great state of michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. dingell: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. dingell: madam speaker, if you listen to the republicans today, they're telling us, don't bother them with the facts, their minds are made up. they are unaware of the fact that the congressional budget office says that this is going to create four million jobs in the health care legislation. they don't tell us that the same congressional budget office says that passage of h.r. 2 is going to increase the deficit by $140 billion. and they also are telling us, the american people want this repeal. they don't. they understand what this means. it means that no longer are people going to get the protections that the health insurance bill gives. no more protections that the

republicans get their way against pre-existing conditions and recisions, denying people health care because of something that happened to them down the road before. no longer will americans be protected against frivolous and improper behavior by the insurance companies. this is a bad role. it is not on facts but on fiction. if this body is going to legislate and legislate well we need the facts, not fiction, no deceit, not misleading statements by our republican colleagues. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california continues to reserve the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. doggett: if you are hit by

a truck this afternoon or your child contracts a dreaded disease your future ought not to depend on the fine print in an insurance policy you didn't have anything to do with writing. no insurance monopoly should stand between you and your doctor. unfortunately, the republican party has become little more than an arm of the insurance monopolies. they asked for a vote to further empower those monopolies and we ask for a vote for american families to empower them. a vote to repeal is a vote to maintain health care costs as the leading cause of bankruptcy and credit card debt in this country. it is a vote to require seniors to pay more, more for prescription drugs, more for diabetes and cancer screenings. we can stand with american families today or we can bend and kneel to the insurance monopolies. the choice is clear. let's vote for american

families. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i reserve the balance of my time, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman and former member of the rules, mr. welch from vermont. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from vermont is recognized for one minute. mr. welch: i thank the gentlelady from new york. i say, madam speaker, to my republican colleagues, you can't -- you beat us good, you ran on the agenda of defeating health care and repealing it. now you're doing it. own it. admit what it is you are doing. this is not a campaign. we're playing with fire. we're taking away health care benefits to make a real difference to our families. number one, this bill will raise the deficit by $230 billion. fiscal responsibility out the window. second, things that matter to families, their kids starting out getting $10 an hour job without health care. they have it now on their

parent's policies. we are taking it away. pre-existing conditions. you have cancer, want to buy insurance, you can't. repeal, you can't. you lose it. lifetime caps. if you are with cancer or diabetes and you need that insurance, you lose it before you can go without it. and preventive care, we're taking it away from seniors who are trying to take care of themselves, get those free mammograms, keep the cost of health care down. you are taking it away. admit it. own it. state it proudly. it's what you campaigned on. it's what you're doing. but don't try to sugarcoat what this is about. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. the gentleman from california continues to reserve. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from new york -- the gentlelady from california, mrs. capps. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for one minute. mrs. capps: madam speaker, the issue facing the country is jobs.

instead of repealing health care we should bring up a jobs bill like the china currency reform. and so i rise in strong opposition to the rule and the underlying bill. today, i speak on behalf of millions of americans who are currently benefiting from the law and have yet been shut out of the legislative process. the way in which this legislation has been brought to this floor is a travesty. before the affordable care act became law in the house alone, we held nearly 80 hearings on the merits of reform. but this bill to repeal this life-saving law has not had a single hearing, not one amendment has been allowed for an up or down vote here today. that's probably because the majority knows hearings would show that the law is already a real success. while we may disagree on the policy, we should be able to agree on the process. and this, my friends, is not the way to move legislation in the house of representatives. we've all agreed upon that, and that's why i urge my colleagues, especially the new members who ran on the promise of ensuring an open congress, vote against this rule.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from california. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california continues to reserve. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. garegare a lot of talk here on the -- mr. garamendi: a lot of talk here on the floor about job killers. the affordable health care bill creates some 400,000 jobs. the repeal of it is actually a killer of human beings. some 40,000 americans die every year for lack of health insurance. that's the reality. repeal this bill and you're going to find more americans dying. also, you're doing away with this repeal of the affordable health care act, of the patients bill of rights. i was insurance commissioner in california. i know exactly what the insurance companies will do if

this repeal goes forward. they will continue to rescind policies. they will continue to deny coverage. they will continue to make sure that those 23-year-old children that have graduated from college will no longer be able to be on their parent's policies. this repeal is perhaps the worst thing you can do to americans in their health care. and besides that, you will significantly increase the deficit by $230 billion. . i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. the gentleman continues to reserve. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record the figures from today's jobs report showing that since the enactment of health reform in march, 2010, the which has created 11.1 million private sector jobs. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: i yield one minute to the gentleman from california, mr. thompson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: madam speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this rule that we are taking up

today instead of focusing on jobs. the new majority in the house ran on the platform of fiscal responsibility. this bill flies in the face of that promise by adding $230 billion in the short run and over $1 trillion in the long run to our deficit. as important, under repeal the medicare trust fund will become insolvent by 2017. that's just six years away. pushing medicare over the cliff by passing this repeal breaks the sacred trust with our nation's seniors to help provide health care coverage in retirement after a lifetime of working and paying taxes. that's why i went to rules committee last night with two colleagues and offered and amendment to guarantee that repeal will not go forward unless it's certified that that repeal will not shorten the life of the medicare trust fund. sadly, the rules committee

didn't allow us to help protech america's seniors, they didn't allow that amendment. we will not be able to vote for that amendment on the floor. and i urge a no vote on this rule. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: may i inquire, first how much time is remaining on each side, and of my colleague how many more speakers she has. the speaker pro tempore: 7 1/2 for california. 5 1/2 for the gentlelady from new york. mr. dreier: madam speaker, then in light of that i'm very happy to yield one minute to a physician, another hardworking member of this freshman class, the gentlewoman from new york, ms. hayworth. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york is recognized for one minute. ms. hayworth: madam speaker, as a physician i understand the profound importance of the goals of the health care bill passed last year. to assure that all americans have affordable, portable health

insurance, providing access to good medical care. i also understand that -- the disruptions this law is already causing to our economy, the predictable side effects of legislative bad medicine, and the reason we must repeal and replace it. the bill we will be considering is in no way nearly imbolic. it represents the true will of the american people. the majority of whom have stated time after time to this day that they reject this law. the house's vote to repeal is the first step towards assuring that all americans will have the quality, choice, and innovation in health care. that they expect and deserve. we need to proceed expeditiously . according to the rule on which we vote today, with the understanding that we are taking meaningful and crucial action. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlelady yields back. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: thank you, madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from organizeon, mr. defazio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for one minute. mr. defazio: previous speaker's right. this is not symbolic, it's real. in fact, the republicans are going to allow the return of the worst abuses of the health insurance industry. pre-existing condition exclusions. taking away your policy when you get sick. lifetime and annual caps. throwing your kids off your policies. the republican repeal of this bill would enable all those things for their very, very generous benefactors in the insurance industry. i haven't had a single constituent and i know you haven't, begged you to bring back these abuses. is that what you are doing? is that what they want? you could take steps right now, in fact, to rein in this industry, and 400 people in this house voted for it last year.

let's take away their unfair exemption from antitrust law so they can't collude to drive up prices, they can't collude to take away your insurance, they can't collude to that throw your kids off and all the other anti-competitive things an industry does. i offered that amendment to rules last night. the republicans, despite the chairman of the committee and others having voted for it last year, would not allow it. this is an insurance industry bill plain and simple. 7 the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: at this time i'm happy to yield one minute to another hardworking physician, a member of this new freshman class, the gentleman from south pittsburgh, tennessee, dr. desjarlais. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. mr. desjarlais: madam speaker, today i rise to support the rule and to support the repeal of the obama health care law. as a physician who has practiced medicine in rural tennessee

under the onerous tenn care law, i know parent that this law does not work. it restricts access to health care. it increases the cost, and it does not deliver on the promises the minority made when they passed the law. the american people have had their say. they do not want this bill. they want it repealed and they want to see health care reform that will increase access and lower costs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yield back. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. green. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. green: thank you, madam speaker. i thank my colleague from the rules committee for allowing me to speak. i ask unanimous consent to place my full statement in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. green: i rise in strong opposition to this rule on h.r. 2, patient's rights repeal. just yesterday the congressional

budget office said that this repeal would cost $230 billion in additional federal debt. it's amazing this is our first major piece of legislation and the republicans are already adding to the national debt. the issue facing our country is jobs. instead of repealing health care, we should be bringing up a jobs bill like the china currency reform. where is that bill on the floor with the new majority? let me tell you what this bill will do. at least in texas we will see tragedy happen. 161,000 young adults will lose their insurance coverage through their parents' health care plan. that's only in texas. 2.8 million texans who have medicare coverage will be forced to pay co-pays now for preventive surgeries, like mammogram services. medicare will no longer pay for the annual visit of nearly 2.8 million texans and many more americans for medicare. 128,682 texans on medicare will receive higher prescription costs if this bill is repealed.

i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, could i inquire again of my friend how many more speakers she has remaining at this point? ms. slaughter: i have four. mr. dreier: i think with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from maryland, mr. cummings. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for one minute. mr. cummings: thank you very much, madam speaker. i rise in opposition to this rule. despite ardent promises from republicans that all bills would be considered under regular order, this resolution has neither been debated nor voted on by a single committee of jurisdiction. additionally, the recently passed republican rules package requires that all legislation be fully paid for and yet the republican leadership has already publicly declared that they have no intention of paying for what is estimated to be a

$230 billion increase in the deficit that the repeal of health reform would create by 2021. according to the congressional budget office. worse than the republicans' already broken promises are what this rule and the underlying resolution would do to children, seniors, and all americans suffering from illnesses. i strongly oppose this rule and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield one minute to another great new member. the gentlelady from 340 -- missouri, miss archer. --miss archer. miss archer: i can testify as a person newly elected and been on the campaign trail for a while in the fourth district we have small businesses that are not hiring and not expanding because

of the health care bill. we have got to repeal this so that we can create more jobs. i'm a small business owner myself and i can tell you since this has passed that health insurance premiums have voted -- skyrocketed. the anticipation of the mandate will be forced on them. if we want to get serious about creating jobs, we need to start by repealing this. this is also a bill to rein in the run away spending. that is devastating our country and it's mortgaging our children's future. as a another that's important to me. this bill put another $1.2 trillion of debt on our country. we cannot afford that. and lastly, this is a freedom bill. the people in my district do not want the government telling them they have to buy a private product and then mandating what is in that product. that is unconstitutional. by passing this last year, you have taken away my freedom, the freedom of the people of the fourth district, and the people of this country. we deserve better. thank you.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: let me inquire of my colleague how many speakers he has left. mr. dreier: madam speaker, let me just say to my friend from rochester that i will be the final speaker. ms. slaughter: you're ready to close. mr. dreier: i'm ready to close. ms. slaughter: thank you. mr. dreier: how many more speakers does the gentlewoman have? ms. slaughter: two left. i would like to yield one of those minutes to ms. sutton from ohio. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from ohio is recognized for one minute. ms. sutton: thank you, madam speaker the issue facing this country is jobs. instead of rushing to the aid of the insurance industry to reinstate their right to engage in egregious discriminatory practices of discriminating against adults and children based on pre-existing conditions, instead of allowing

the doughnut hole to continue to bear down on our seniors, we should be passing real jobs legislation. urgently we should be bringing up jobs bills that will make a real difference like putting an end to china's currency manipulation. we have heard the numbers, 2.4 million jobs lost across the country. 92,000 jobs lost in ohio. and 5,700 jobs have been lost in my congressional district due to china's deliberate and abusive trade policies. we can do something about this issue today and we should. it makes a real difference. i hope that our friends across the aisle will stand with american businesses and american workers and put an end to the abusive practice of china's currency manipulation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i'll continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: i yield for a unanimous consent request, the gentleman, mr. butterfield, from

north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. butterfield: i thank the gentlelady. i ask unanimous consent that my statement be included in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. andrews: thank you, madam speaker. there are 15 million americans unemployed this morning. they do not want us to play politics with health care, they want to us work together to create jobs. there is a job killer loose in america. the job killer is unfair trade practices that force the outsourcing of our jobs. there is a proposal that has broad agreement between republicans and democrats to bring fair trade back to america. if we defeat the previous question, we will move to amend the rule to make in order the currency reform for fair trade act which simply says this.

as the chinese have been slamming the door shut on our workers and products, we have been opening our shelves in american department stores. no more of that. no more outsourcing of jobs. no more unfair trade practices. a fair and level playing field for american workers. let's work together to create jobs and stop the politics and the waste of time of health care. vote no on the previous question. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i'll continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: i would like to pause for unanimous consent request for mr. engel, the gentleman from new york. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york. mr. engel: i rise in opposition to this amendment. it seems that the openness of the new majority promised us lasted half a day.

and changed the order remain the same. i urge my colleagues to vote no. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, if we are able to beat the previous question, i will move to amend the rule to make in order a bill, h.r. 2378, from the last congress, the currency reform for fair trade act, which invokes our anti-dumping laws and provides relief for american workers and companies injured by unfair exchange rate policies. . i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record the text of the currency reform for the fair trade act. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: and i yield to the gentleman from new york for a parliamentary inquiry. >> madam speaker, i have a parliamentary inquiry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state his parliamentary inquiry. mr. weiner: what is the current whole number of the members of the house? the speaker pro tempore: the whole number of the house is

435. mr. weiner: madam speaker, further parliamentary inquiry. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will state. mr. weiner: can the speaker state that all have been sworn as under the constitution? the speaker pro tempore: the speaker, it's her belief that all have been sworn. mr. weiner: thank you. ms. slaughter: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i yield myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: thank you, madam speaker. this is the first act of the 112th congress and i am particularly gratified that we had six new members of this 87-member republican class participate in this debate. because, madam speaker, they have come here with a very, very strong, powerful message from the american people. that message is that we have to make sure that we create jobs

and get our economy back on track. even though we've goten this positive news of the reduction of the unemployment rate from 9.8% to 9.3% this morning, tragically last month only 105,000 new jobs were created. that's not enough to sustain our economy. you have to create at least 150,000 just to be treading water. and so we know that the american people are continuing to suffer. and the message that has come from the american people through these 87 new members is that we have to have a laser-like focus on creating jobs, getting our economy back on track and reduce the size and scope and reach of the federal government. my friend, mr. pence and i, had an exchange which we said only in washington, d.c., can a $2.7 trillion increase, saying that

cutting that, eliminating that, scrapping that will in fact cost money. it's absolutely crazy, but that's what they're arguing, and through their sleight of hand with the congressional budget office they are continuing to claim that somehow it will save money. madam speaker, we are doing what we told the american people we would do. it's very simple. beginning last year we said we would have a very clean, up or down vote, an up or down vote should we maintain this $2.7 trillion expansion with government mandates and increased taxes or should we repeal it, and that's what we're going to be voting on after the three-deleover next week. and, madam speaker, are we in fact committing ourselves to doing everything that we possibly can to ensure that every single american has access to quality, affordable

health care and health insurance? and that's what the resolution i introduced, h.res. 9, will do. it will direct the six committees of jurisdiction to begin immediately working on ways in which we can drive the cost of health insurance down. i personally believe that we need to allow for the purchase of insurance across state lines which is now forbidden under the karen ferguson act. i believe we -- the karon-ferguson act. i believe we need to have lower rates. we need to have pooling for pre-existing conditions. we need to expand medical savings accounts and, yes, madam speaker, the fifth thing we need to do is to have meaningful lawsuit abuse reform so that resources can go towards doctors and not trial lawyers. and, madam speaker, these are the kinds of things that these new members are telling us need to be done and that's exactly

what passage of this rule will make happen. madam speaker, let me say i urge support of this rule and i urge support of the underlying legislation, and once again, with zeal, enthusiasm and gratitude, i move the previous >> later, majority leader eric cantor and minority whip steny hoyer outline the schedule for next week. this is 23 minutes. jobs but in any event, i thank the gentleman for announcing the schedule. i want to say we're disappointed however, as he was in -- when he was in my position, that we are -- that we don't have a committee process for this very important piece of legislation. i think it's important from your perspective and it's important from our perspective,

though we may have different perspectives on whether it should pass or fail. but it is an important piece of legislation. there was no committee process no hearings. no opportunity for the public to be heard on the bill. no opportunity for the members to ttify. with respect to that bill. no witnesses were heard. and furthermore, under the rule, of course, we have been given no opportunity to amend. the gentleman, when he was in my position, would repeatedly indicate how disappointed he was that there were no amendments allowed on certain bills. i want to reiterate that concern and given the lack of amendments, i want to clarify what he believes will be the finishing of votes on wednesday. i understand debate will begin on tuesday. is that -- and conclude on

wednesday? mr. cantor: i ask the gentleman to repeat the question. mr. hoyer: what time do you expect to conclude business on wednesday? mr. cantor: i would say to the gentleman, madam speaker, that it is our intention to conclude by 7:00 p.m. on wednesday. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for that response. in light of the fact that you have made -- your side has made a pledge to allow ample time for members to read and consider, and notwithstanding that they've already not pursued that as vigorously as i think you would have hoped and perhaps we would have hoped as well, in the 112th congress, i was wondering if the gentleman can enlighten us on what he expects to consider the rest of january after next week so

members might have opportunities to anticipate issues that you're going to be bringing forward. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman, madam speaker. as to the quiry about openness and the ability for members to have time to read the bills, as well as for the public to realize its right to know, we on our side believe in making sure there is that adequate time and we posted on monday legislation coming to the floor for this week and next. so i would say to the gentleman from maryland, madam speaker, that it is our intention to continue to uphold our commitment to the three-day rule, allow for the public's right to know as well as members themselves to understand what it is we're voting for. as to the gentleman's comments regarding the up or down vote on obamacare repeal, if the gentleman has looked at the postings online, he'll know

that the repeal resolution is a page and a half. this is a repeal of a bill that was the subject of significant legislative time and other over the course of the last t years. it is clear that the public has litigated and in essence has decided its position on that bill given the results of november's election. and it's -- it comes down to whether you're for obamacare or against it. that's what the vote is. again a page and a half. that's what the bill is. so we have committe to continuing in the vein of an open process when it comes to trying to get it right as far as replacing the health care status quo. and we have committed a the speaker has committed to making

sure that our committees will go through regular order, members of the minority and majority will have ample time to engage in par -- engage and participaten the discussions around what type of health care americans deserve and what type of health care they want. which is how we will proceed when it comes to the so-called replacement resolution and its implementation. i would also point outo the gentleman from maryland that the rules committee has accepted the amendment proposed by the gentleman from utah as far as a suggestion that he had regarding the s.g.r. forma and the reimbursements for physicians under the medicare program. again, we are trying to work in a fashion that open, that is as inclusive as we can, as the

speaker said in his remarks, the speaker says we had, and was correct when he said we had no open rules under the last congress. we intend for that not to be the case here. i know that the gentleman joins me in the desire for us to be able to work together and we believe that that will provide the best way forward for that. as to the gentleman's question about the remainder of january, madam speaker, we intend to focus on the tme of this congress, which is cut and grow. we're going to be talking about ways to cut spending, we are going to live up to our commitment to bring a spending cut bill to the floor each and ery week, madam speaker, we also intend to focus on what it is that is impedi job growth in the economy and will be asking our committees to begin focusing on regulations tt are being promulgated and pursued throughout the

administration and its agencies that are precluding job growth. it is our hope, though, madam speaker, that these committees, our committees, will be fully organized by the end of the month so we can begin a process of regular order and i yield back. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for his comments. obviously the health care bill he seeks, he and his party seek to repeal had probably more consideration, more open debate, more transparency, more amendments, more hearings, than almost any bill that i have considered as a member of this congress over the last three decades. full and open consideration. amendments offered from both sides in committee on a very ample basis. but i am glad to hear that you agree that there have been

ample debate time for that. there has not been any debate time in committees or amendments on the repeal of that law. i certainly am hopeful the gentleman does not mean to say that if the majority party concludes that the american public have already decided an issue, that there n't be, therefore, that will be the exception to the rule that you have put forth in terms of full and ample notice, debate, amendment process and transparency. i would certainly hope that that would not be the case. i don't expect it to be the case and i hope it won't be let me say in addition, that i'm very pleased that the majority party allowed in order the amendment by mr. matheson. as you know, we tried to have a permanent fix to the reimbursement of doctors who

took medicare patients, unfortunately, the minority party in theenate which had the opportunity to do that precluded us from accomplishing that objective. so i'm pleased that that needs to be done. we need to have a stable funding expectation by doctors when they provide services to medicare patients, to senior, as we want them to do and we want them to continue to do. i'm pleased you athrude amendment. i would hope that members on your side would be supporting that amendment as we will on this side. let me ask youow, mr. majority leader, i am very concerned, i expressed this on the floor, your rules in my view, provide for some5 trillion to be incurred in additional deficits. .

they allow that because you have exempted almost all of the possible reductions in revenues, tax cuts, reductions in revenues, notwithstanding no reduction in spending. well, if you reduce revenues and you don't reduce spending, commensurately, inevitably, you will create a large deficit which inevitably will be paid by future generations. that's been the experience that, again, i have had when we had significant tax cuts in the 1980's. and last decade, the decade of 2000, 2001, 2003 where we created very large deficits. my presumption is you will be finding a commensurate reduction s in spending to your tax cuts that you want to continue. if you don't do that, deficits

will inevitably follow. the majority party has not done that in years past. is it your expectation that that will occur in the future? but e question i want to ask you as well is that you have provided in your rules essentially ignoring c.b.o. scores. the nonpartisan congressional budget office which serves us has issued a preliminary score for the republican patients' bill of rights, they believe it will increase the deficit by $230 billion in the first 10 years by repeal and $1.2 trillion in the second 10 years. my question is having deemed in the rule today a provision allowing the chair of the budget committee,r. ryan, to ignore the c.b.o. score, will the majority continue to ignore c.b.o. scores on legislation for the rest of congress or will we

be fiscally responsible n. m view, and adhere to -- responsible, in my view, and adhere to the advice and counsel we receive from c.b.o. i yield. mr. cantor: madam speaker, i respond to his first question by saying that washingt doesn't have a revenue problem it has a spending problem. and we believe that it is better to allow folks to keep pore of -- more of their hard-earned money so we can see a return to growth in our economy and that we are dedicated to making sure we deal with the spending problem here in washington. as i said before to the gentlema we are intending and will bring to the floor each and every week a bill that cuts spending. we are very focused as you know in bringing spending down to 2008 levels to make sure that we are abiding by our commitment to live according to the same rules

that everyone else does while businesses and families are living within their means, tightening their belts, there is no reason in the world why washington can't as well. i'm sure the gentleman agrees with me on that. as for the issues surrounding the c.b.o., the issue that we have and dispute we have is not with the congressional budget office. c.b.o. scores what's put in front of them. the reality is the obamacare bill relied on smoke and mirrors and budgetary shell games in order to present the picture that it presents or allegation to represent. -- alleges to represent. madam speaker, there is nothing that has changed about the flawed assumptions underlying the old score of the obamacare bill, only the dates have changed. this is the same gimmicks, producing more false deficit reduction, and in fact real spending increases. in fact, the gentleman knows,

madam speaker, the medicare's chief actuary says that the obamacare bill represents a maze of mandates, tax hikes, and subsidies that will push costs up. the bottom line, madam speaker, is we need to stop arguing about inside baseball budget gimmicks. there is no question that a new open-ended entitlement program will growunsustainably fast, will drive costs up, and could potentially bankrupt this federal government as well as our states. so with that, madam speaker, i yield back. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman. i want to say to my friend, the continuing rhetoric is washington doesn't have a revenue problem it has a spending problem. americans in every family that i know understand that their

revenues directly impact on their spending and vice versa. and if they don't, they have a real problem. they don't have enough revenue to meet their ependitures, they have a problem. and if their spending exceeds their revenue they have a problem. i tell my friend, i understand what you're saying and i have heard this rhetoric all of my career here in the congress. i tell my friend that when esident reagan was president we never overrode a presidential veto of an appropriation bill because it spent too much. he veeyoted it spent too much, never had a veto overwritten. nevertheless we incurred an additional $1.5 trillion in deficits. under president bush, george h.w. bush, we didn't override any veto of his and we incurred

an additnal trillion dollars. that was $2.5 trilon plus. under the clinton administration , of course, economic program as you and i both know that your party universally opposed, we had a surplus. the only president in your lifetime and i think in mine, which is substantially longer, that's had four years of surplus. now, i know you say, response that mr. dreier gave to me is that well, yes, we took over the congress in 1995. that's correct. and of course not only did you take over the congress in 1995 but in 2000 you took over the presidency as well and controlled the house and the senate and the presidency. and during that period of time we didn't pass any appropriation bills on our side. you were in full charge during the bush administration, fst six years, and $3.5 trillion of

deficit spending was incurred making a total of over $5 trilli of deficit spending during the time that your party took the position that we didn't have a revenue problem we had a spending problem. well, it ended up being a $5 trillion deficit problem adding to the deficit for our children. and for my grandchildren and for my great granddaughter. i'm concerned about that. and that is why i'm so concerned about statutory pay-go. sticking with c.b.o. scores, and accommodating our spending and revenue. th are both related, obviously, and to ignore that -- eliminating revenue without eliminating spending doesn't cause deficits i think is to ignore reality. i'm sorry, i hope my friend

would talk to mr. ryan, the budget committee, and bring us legislation which would, in fact, do what you and i want to do. that is eliminate the deficit. if we got two messages during this past election, in my view, it was, a, focus on creating jobs. we got to get to work. americans are hurting. we had some good job numbers this month. we have created over $1.3 million jobs this past year as opposed to losing almost four million jobs in the last year of the bush administration. that's progress. but as i have said so often, it's not success. success will be when every american who wants a job learn to work, can -- willing to work, can fine a job that can support him or her and their families. but we need to not pretend that revenues and spending are not

inextricably related. if we give up revenues before we do the difficult thing, the tough thing, the adult thing, as mr. boehner said, and cut the spending, then cut the revenues if americans are buying it, then ought to be paying for it and not passing along the bill to our grandchildren. i would hope the gentleman would pursue that. if the gentleman wants to respond to that, i'll say something about health care, briefly. mr. cantor: madam speaker, the gentleman and i have gone through these discusons the last few years and when we get into discussing the past, i normally posit a quote from winston churchill when he said if we open a karl between the past and present we shall find we have lost the future. anwhat my response is, madam speaker, we are looking to see that we do take the tough steps and cut spending. i'm hopeful with all the renewed

enthusiasm that all of us have gained after the election towards fiscal sanity that the gentleman and his caucus can join us and vote with us in terms of the spending cuts that we'll be bringing to the floor every week. the gentleman speaks about revenues. and absolutely as an ongoing concern this government has to be concerned with that. but we first and foremost must understand that i think both of us realize, madam speaker, that in order to have revenues, we've got to have a growing economy. so there is a balance. and that is where i perhaps our two visions diverge. it is my hope that we can work together by putting priorities in place, cutting spending, growing the economy. that's the formula by which we will be operating. i'm hopefuwe can operate on those formulas and that formula together. i yield back.

mr. hoyer: i appreciate the gentleman's comment and simply in closing, madam speaker, let me say this. i hope we can cooperate, but we do have a divergence as my friend pointed out. that's the nature of what the house of representatives does, debates differentiate points of view. frankly, my experience as i have said is that when we diverged in a point of view in 1993, when my republican friends took the position that accommodating revenues to spending would, in fact, from their perspective, be a job killer, they talk a lot about job killing legislation. they all voted against that legislation in 1993. and in fact some of my colleagues on my side of the aisle lost their election because of voting for that piece of legislation. in fact, however, it helped

create the most robust economy anybody in this chamber has experienced their lifetime. it created over 22 million jobs as opposed to losing eight million jobs in the last administration under president bush so that there was a substantial difference which you can see, touch, and feel. and read about and know about. so i tell my friend, yes, there's a difference of opinion, but there is no difference of opinion on what happened. and when winston churchill, you quoted before, and of whom i'm a great fan, one of the things that winston churchill was most known for was trying to remind his british friends, don't forget what dictators and despots do. remember, and i make no aspersions, i want to make that clear, i'm simply saying he

believed strongly in learning from the past. and not continuing to make mistakes and not continue to do what failed in years before. so i agree with the gentleman. looking at the past is for instruction on how to make the future better and to create those jobs that both he and i want to create. and america is certainly lookokk >> tuesday and wednesday the house takes up the repeal of the health care law. goed to c-span.org to read the bill on line and continue the conversation on facebook and twitter. >> next, president obama talks about the latest unemployment figures and announces new members of his economic team. after that, federal reserve chairman ben bernanke testifies

before the senate budget committee. then federal reserve system governor elizabeth duke' discusses the u.s. economy. >> this weekend, robert kaplan on the geopolitical importance of the indian ocean region. thomas bailey on his experiences during the first months of the surge. the marines baptism by fire, and edward rowe porter says there is a price on every decision a person makes, and most people don't realize how often it is a motivating factor in shaping their lives. and the complete schedule at booktv.org. >> dow, president obama introduces four new members of his economic team and notes that the economy has created jobs for 12 months straight for the first time since 2006. the new appointees include gene

sperling, a former adviser to president bill clinton, who moved from the treasury department to the director of the national economic council. this event at a windows manufacturing plant in maryland took place a few hours after the latest jobs report from the government, which showed a decline in the unemployment rate last month and 9.8% to 9.4%. this is 20 minutes. [applause] >> please, everybody have a seat. it is wonderful to be with all of you today. i want to make just a couple of quick acknowledgments. first of all we have one of the fund senators from the great state of maryland, ben cardin in the house. [applause]

i want to thank the ceo and all the employees here at thomson, they do so much for your hospitality and the great work you are doing. [applause] and now want to acknowledge the family and guests of those who are standing behind me today. it is wonderful to be here at thompson creek and i want to thank rick for showing me how you manufacture more efficient windows at this factory. as he explained to me, this is a family business. rick was just 13 when his father fred opened the company, and back then, his family lived above the store, and rick

started out sweeping floors. three decades later, thompson creek has expanded and has already outgrown this new 80,000 square foot facility that it moved into just three years ago , and i will bet sometimes brickfield lucky is still living at the plant. that is what happens when you are in charge. but building this business has been an extraordinary accomplishment for his family. it speaks not only to him, it also speaks to all the employees here today, the hard working men and women who make this company work. and it speaks to the promise of america, the idea that if you have a dream and you are willing to work hard, then you can succeed. that promise is at the heart of who we are as a people and it is

at the heart of our economic might. is what gives an entrepreneur the courage to start a business , or a company confidence to expand. it is what leads to new products and new ideas, and technologies that have not only made us the world's largest economy but also the most innovative economy in the world. making it possible for businesses to succeed is how we ensure that our economy succeed at all our people succeed. it is how we create jobs. that is what guided my administration for the past two years. government cannot guarantee thompson creek or any business will be successful, but government cannot down barriers like a lack of affordable credit or high costs for investment or high costs for hiring. we can do something about that. government can remove obstacles

in your path. that is why we cut taxes for small businesses over the last two years. for example, when a tax break for hiring unemployed workers, thompson gregg was able to grow its work force from 200 employees to nearly 300 employees in just one year. it took the advantage of the tax credits that we put into place. we also passed a tax credit for products like energy-saving windows. that led to pick it up% boost in the sales at this plant -- lead to a 55% boost in sales at this plant. that is exactly what we intended, exactly what we wanted to see, explaining to the american people you can save money on your energy bill and this is a smart thing to do, take advantage of it.

incentives like these are helping companies across america. the jobs numbers released this morning reflect that wrote. the economy added more than 100,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate fell sharply. we know these numbers can bounce around from month to month, but the trend is clear. we saw 12 straight months of private sector job growth. that is the first time that has been true since 2006. the economy added 1.3 million jobs last year, and each quarter was stronger than the previous quarter, which means the pace of hiring is beginning to pick up. we are also seeking more optimistic economic forecasts for the year ahead, in part due to the package of tax cuts us signed last month, including a payroll tax cut for workers and

a series of tax cuts to encourage investment and innovation and hiring. i fought for the package because even though our economy is recovering, we have still got a lot to do. this was a recession that we went through, the worst in our lifetimes. it left a lot of destruction in its wake, more than 8 million jobs were lost. so even though we have created 1.3 million jobs, we saved a lot of jobs, we still have a bunch of folks who were out there looking, still struggling. we have a big hole we are digging ourselves out of. so our mission has to be to accelerate hiring and growth. that depends on making our economy more competitive so that we or fostering new jobs and new industries and training workers to fill them. it depends on keeping up the fight for every job and every business and every opportunity

to spur growth. and so standing with me here today are men and women who will help america fulfill this mission. let me just introduce each of them. we are joined first of all by gene sperling who i have appointed director of the national economic council. give him a big round of applause. [applause] he has been an extraordinary asset to me and this administration over the past two years. he led our efforts to pass the small business jobs bill to help companies all across america. he also helped negotiate the tax compromise that we passed at the end of this year. he is a public servant who has devoted his life to making this economy work and making it work specifically for middle-class families.

one of the reasons i select him is, he has done this before. this is his second tour of duty, and in his tenure in the clan administration he helped formulate a policy that contributed to turning deficits to surpluses, and the time of prosperity and progress for american families in a sustained way. the people bring the level of intelligence and a work ethic that he brings to every assignment he has ever taken and with such decency and integrity. we are lucky to have you back at the nbc and i know you will do a terrific job. i know he will because he is going to have jason firman working with them. i am pleased to elevate him to be principal deputy at the economic council. give him a big round of applause. [applause]

over the past two years i have relied on jason's advice and expertise on a range of economic issues, from helping design the emergency steps we took to prevent our economy from sinking into a second great depression, to working to pass the tax-cut compromise. i am confident he will continue to do great work and is greater capacity. we are also joined by someone i have come to rely on as an adviser and a friend since my first days as a presidential candidate. heather higgins bottom is currently the deputy director of domestic policy council or she has been the point person of education as we have pursued some of the most innovative and important reforms in decades. i am proud to nominate heather to now serve as deputy director of the office of management and budget. she understands the relationship between numbers on a letter and

the lives of real people as we make cuts that are necessary to rein in the deficit. i want to make sure i have heather their so that we are meeting our final obligations to our people and to our economy as well. so give heather a big round of applause. [applause] and finally i am nominating katharine abraham to the council of economic advisers. [applause] she brings a wealth of experience as an economist, as a commissioner of the bureau of labor statistics during the clinton administration. i am confident she will provide the kind of unbiased, unvarnished advice that will help us craft the best policies to strengthen its economy in the years to come. part of our mission, part of

this team's mission in the months ahead will be to maximize the steps we have taken to spur the economy. one of the most important is allowing businesses to immediately deduct the entire cost of certain investments like for new equipment that i was taking a look at. this is a policy i fought for over the past two years. we were able to pass it finally as part of the tax-cut compromise. it is going to make a real difference for our economy. talking to rick, i know thompson creek is planning to take full of advantage of this tax break. that is going to help thompson creek renovate, expand, and add another 100 new employees right here. [applause] that is worth applauding. that is good. you have companies like this all

over the country and the treasury department estimates that overall this will accelerate $102 billion of tax cuts for 2 million businesses over the next two years. so i want to urge all businesses with capital needs to take advantage of this temporary expensing provision. we expected to lower the average cost of investment by more than 75% for companies like thompson creek. it is a powerful new incentive for businesses and a great opportunity for companies to grow and add jobs. now is the time to act. companies who are listening out there, if you are planning or thinking about making investments sometime in the future, make those investments now and you will save money. that will help us grow the economy. it will help you grow your business. overall, the decline in the unemployment rate is positive

news, but it only underscores the importance of us not letting up on our efforts. i am looking forward to working with heather and jean and catherine in jason and everybody at the white house. we have one focus, and that is making sure that we are duplicating the success of places like thompson creek all across the country. we want businesses to grow. we want this economy to grow and what to put people back to work. i want to promise everybody at thompson creek and across the country we will not rest until we have fully recover from this recession and we have reached that rider day. thank you very much, everybody. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪ ♪

♪

named as a national economic

council director held the same post in clinton and administration from 1997 to 2001. after serving as deputy director of the economic council. currently, he is counselor to treasury secretary to timothy geithner. he is a leave policy adviser on issues including job creation and small-business issues. he graduated from the university of minnesota and yale law school. next, federal reserve chairman been bernanke and then elizabeth discusses the economy. after that, if for one u.s.- china military relations. >> on tomorrow's washington journal, a look at the u.s. economy with sudeep reddy.

and roger pilon and frank oliveri. that is on washington journal at 7:00 a.m. eastern time on c- span. >> i think that new organizations have adapted it is a great that we are not doing as much for the news? the public takes responsibility. the public bears responsibility of keeping themselvesd. -- themselves involved. parks at 8-8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's "q&a." there reserve chairman been bernanke says that the u.s. economy is showing signs of self sustaining recovery, but he cautions that it might take up to five years for unemployment levels to fall to historic

norms. his remarks came before the senate budget committee. other topics include a $600 billion plan to buy bonds to stimulate the economy, changes to the tax code and the financial health of cities and states. this is just over two 0.5 hours. -- two 0.5 -- 2.5 hours. i very much welcome senator sessions as my partner on this committee. he has considerable knowledge of

the budget, the budget process and i look forward to working with him as we confront the significant challenges facing the country. i also want to become pro reserve chairman been bernanke. this is his third appearance here. i believe that when the history of this time is written, that you will be one of the heroes of the peace in averting what could have been a financial collapse. i was in the meeting with the former secretary of the treasury and you when you wonder how serious the financial circumstances were in late 2008. of those moments will be forever rooted in my memory and i am sure in yours as well. i personally believe that you and the secretary of the treasury hank paulson, followed by this administration, have

taken steps that were critically important to averting a financi. inancial collapse. not only here but globally as well. still, our nation faces very serious challenges. we know we are on an unsustainable course with the budget, borrowing about 40 cents of every dollar that we spend. clearly that cannot continue for very long. on the other hand, we also face a fragile economy. with one in every six workers in this country either unemployed or underemployed, that requires our immediate attention as well. my own belief is that we need to put in place a plan this year to get our fiscal house back in order. and that plan needs to be phased in over a period of time, along the lines of what the fiscal commission proposed. finca we also understand -- i think we also understand where

we have. this has been an extraordinary period in the country's economic history. i'd like to just go over a brief history of what we have experienced. i personally believe the federal response didn't avert what could have been a financial collapse. i believe it was that serious. in the meetings i was and with the then secretary of the treasury hank paulson and you, mr. chairman, risks were very clear. we have seen some progress made. in fact, important progress made, private sector job growth has returned, although not as much as we would have liked. we heard the numbers this morning, something over 100,000 jobs created in the private sector. a dramatic improvement from where we were back in january of 2009 when we were losing 800,000 private sector jobs a month. now we have had 12 consecutive

months of private sector job growth. and economic growth, the pattern is the same although actually somewhat better. in the fourth quarter 2008, the economy actually contracted, actually shrunk by 6.8%. more recently in the third quarter of 2010, we saw positive growth of 2.6%. again, a dramatic improvement while not as strong as we hoped. we have now had five consecutive quarters of growth. we've also seen a dramatic rebound in the stock market, after falling to a low of just about 6500 in march 2009. now the dow is now over 11,500. and two of the most respected economists in the country, mark zandi who is a consultant to the mccain campaign, and alan blinder, a former deputy chairman of the federal reserve,

did an analysis that measure the impact of federal actions, the t.a.r.p. stimulus, and also included the fed's monetary policy actions. and they concluded as follows. we find that its effects on real gdp, jobs and inflation, are huge. and probably a bird what could have been called great depression 2.0. when all is said and done the financial and fiscal policies will have cost taxpayers a substantial sum. but not nearly as much as most had feared, and not nearly as much as if policymakers have not acted at all. if the comprehensive policy responses say the economy from another depression as we estimate, they were well worth the cost. this next chart shows doctor blinder and dr. zandi's estimate to the number of jobs we would have without the senate -- the

federal response. it shows we would've had 8 million fewer jobs in the second quarter of 2010 if we had not had the federal response, the t.a.r.p. and the stimulus. we see a similar picture with the unemployment rate. unemployment rate averaged 9.7% in the second quarter. according to dr. blinder and dr. zandi, if we have not had the federal response, the unemployment rate would have been 15% in the second quarter, and would've continued rising to over 16% in the fourth quarter of 2010. so clearly the federal response to the economic crisis has had and continues to have a significant positive impact on the economy. but we are not out of the woods. we can't forget that as i mentioned before, one in every six of our fellow citizens are either unemployed or underemployed. the unemployment rate in december which was also

announced this morning was 9.4%. this is still far too high. the federal reserve projections show the rate is likely to come down only slowly, averaging still in the height eight percentage point range by the fourth quarter of 2012. but as i noted, we must now also pivot to addressing the long-term fiscal imbalances that the country confronts. i believe we are at a critical juncture. we have been borrowing as i mentioned earlier, 40 cents of every dollar that we spend. that cannot continue much longer. spending is at the highest level as a share of our national income in 60 years. revenue is at its lowest level as a share of our national income in 60 years. i believe that indicates you've

got to work both sides of that equation if we are to make progress. gross federal debt is already expected to reach 100% of gdp this year, well above the 90% threshold that many economists see as the danger zone. a leading economist who came before our commission and has come before this committee, doctor reinhard, who have studied 200 years of fiscal crises around the world, she concluded that when government debt as a share of the economy exceeds 90%, and she is referring here to gross federal debt, that economic growth tends to be about one percentage point lower than it would be if debt levels were not so high. if that associations were applied to united states today, it would translate into the potential economic loss of hundreds of billions of dollars and substantially fewer jobs for americans. so i believe the deficit and

debt reduction plan assembled by the fiscal commission could provide a blueprint and a way forward. the plan would stabilize publicly held debt by 2014 and then lower it to 60% of gdp by 2023. and roughly 30% by 2040. i emphasize that's the publicly held debt, not the gross debt. the bipartisan commission who voted for the plan, 60% of us supported either interestingly enough five republicans and five democrats and one independent. i think that demonstrates that we can reach across the aisle to do things that are critically important for the country, facing up to the debt threat is something we must deal and we must do it together. with that we will turn to senator sessions for his opening remarks. and again, i want to welcome him as ranking member of the budget committee. >> thank you, chairman conrad.

it's an honor to be here, to be with you. i respect you very much, and value our friendship and enjoy being ribbed by you. and i look forward to working with you to help make our country better. we have some real serious challenges ahead of us. i also want to note how much i have admired our former ranking member, judd gregg. i know you and he had a great relationship. i think his leadership was particularly valuable. people listen to it. they trusted his judgment, and i hope that i can come close to being as effective as he has been in this position. i'd like to share some thoughts and concerns. i know that when the mortgage crisis hit and the economy was whacked, a lot of people got together and tried to make some

decisions. mr. chairman, it would've been better i think had we seen the mortgage crisis two years in advance and taken action, it would have made the crisis less real. and i say that -- i say that because we are to be humble about where we are today. i don't think anyone fully understand this magnificent world economy we are a part of. i don't think anyone or is it, whether the fed reserve, secretary of treasury, even congress, can have a little meeting and be sure that the action we take is going to have certain impacts on this massive economy of which we are a part, when you're confused in the and you need to return to the fundamental's of blocking and tackling, the fundamentals of paying your bills on time in creating some confidence in the

economy. so today is our committee's first hearing of the 112th congress. we need on the heels of a historic election. it's important, that election. the american people rebelled against wasteful washington spending, and a government that has grown too large and too intrusive. the american people also rebelled against a political establishment that has placed our country on a path of fiscal decline. solving our nation's economic and debt crisis is about more than economics. it's about protecting our way of life, at home, and our standing abroad as a great nation. and it's about honest and moral. our goal is not an era of austerity but an era of prosperity. restoring fiscal discipline and strengthening the private sector is the only way to create growth and opportunity for every hard-working american, and it is the only way to protect our country's greatness and its vital role in the world.

to solve our problems we must speak about this candidly. our nation's debt will soon be equal the size of our entire economy, 40% of our budget relies on borrowed funds. in 2009 the interest on our debt alone cost $187 billion. and the congressional budget office projects that under the president's budget the interest payment will climb to $916 billion in 2020. that exceeds any other part of our budget and is growing faster than any other part of our budget. vastly superior to defense budget. we are on a path that is unsustainable. the only real question is how much, how much will it is between us and the edge of the cliff. the american people understand the situation. they understand that years of

unchecked federal spending has squandered our nation's wealth and threaten our children's future. the american people understand that a leak in washington seems to forget and that is you can only live beyond your means for so long. eventually the bill comes due. fundamentally it is immoral to take from my children their wealth. so, so we spent unearned wealth today. there are other problems. considering the housing bubble, for years congress delayed action to address ready and favorite of federal reserve was asleep at the switch and fail to sound the alarm. then one day the bubble burst and the whole world changed. no one knows exactly what will happen if we continue our spending on the current course, but we must not find out. a recent piece in the "washington times" describing

some of the works of potential consequences and, we need to be more specific about what the consequences will be. he said quote, one day the treasury will hold an auction and it won't be buyers. the federal reserve will step in as a buyer of last resort. conjuring money from the ether, by bonds. the injection of massive liquidity into the financial system will trigger fears of hyperinflation caused the dollar to plunge and interest rates to rise if the resources of the european union and international monetary fund our stretch to rescue the finances of tiny greece and ireland. the united states will not only be too big to fail, but too big to bailout. absent the emergency action by the government, the economy will plunge into a depression roughly three times more acute than the recession we just experienced. i don't know if it would happen like that, but parents also had

an editorial by an experienced wall street of 45 years warning of a hyperinflationary spiral. the writer explained that while the federal reserve could monetize the debt, historically they quote breakpoint occurs when a government borrows an amount equal to 40% of its expenditures for an extended -- extended period of time. in a recent interview, chairman bernanke, you said you were 100% confident the fed could prevent such inflation, but i'm not sure the masses of the universe, you being maybe the master master, how confident you can be about that. been wrong before. and while we can debate just how great an imminent the risk is, there is no debating what the american people have declared in poll after poll. we are on the wrong track. but where is the leadership from our administration?

just last december the president would only agree to maintain current tax rates if congress agreed to new spending, all borrowed, that would add another $250 billion. instead of slowing down, president obama accelerated. but simply easing off the pedal won't solve the problem. when you are driving toward a cliff at 90 miles an hour, you can't just slow down to 60. you need to hit the brakes and steer on to the right road. for too long congress, washington compromise, has changed only the pace and not the direction that we are going. last november the american people said enough. that's precisely what they said, i believe. they sent congress a new freshman class with a clear set of instructions. those instructions include the budget that changes our trajectory and genuinely reduces

the size, cost, and burden of government. we can learn from those who aren't setting a strong example. in new jersey governor chris christie has a plan to close his state funding gap without raising taxes. in britain, the new conservative government has taken strong action and has a plan to reduce the deficit from 10 to 4% of gdp in just four years. as britain's chancellor of the exchequer said, it's a hard road, but it leads to a better future. yet some would argue that reducing government spending, even a small amount, will reduce the quality of our life, but the surest way to lower the quality of life in america is to continue on our current course. spending without restraint, crushing private enterprise, and mortgaging the inheritance of our children.

the challenges ahead may be difficult, but the choices we face are not. we need to limit government, control spending and create an environment where the free market can thrive and flourish it's a roadmap our founders laid out more than two centuries ago. there's no doubt it will work again. america's progress is not a thing of the past. we can do this. to achieve this progress we can no longer compromise our nation's founding principles. instead we must fight for, and in so doing hope to find common grounds in doing so. chairman bernanke, i look forward to discussing these and other issues with you today. i look forward to getting your thoughts on how you and the administration, you're working together, with the plan for strengthening our future. thank you, mr. chairman,. >> thank you so much, senator sessions. i just want to say i welcome

your analysis. we may not agree on every solution. i think the one thing we are agreed on is that we are on an unsustainable course, and we've got an obligation. we've got a very specific, serious and somber obligation to come up with a plan and to do it sooner rather than later. and i look very much forward to working with you on that. >> thank you. i value those comments. >> thank you that you so much for coming. i want to tell the committee that chairman bernanke is also offered to come up here in a closed session with committee members to discuss what he sees with respect to the economy. we very much welcome you being here as our first witness as we embark on the challenge of putting together a budget for this year and succeeding years. welcome. >> thank you. thank you chairman conrad, senator sessions and other members of the committee. i want to thank you for this opportunity to offer my views on

current economic conditions, recent monetary policy ask, and issues related to the federal budget. the economic recovery that began a year and half ago is continuing, although to date at a pace that has been insufficient to reduce the rate of unemployment significantly. the initial stages of the recovery, the second half of 2009 in early 2010, were largely attributable to the stabilization of the financial system, expansionary monetary fiscal policies and a powerful inventory cycle. gross -- growth slowed some this past spring as it went and its european sovereign debt problems lead to increased volatility in financial markets. more recently however we've seen increased evidence a self-sustaining recovery in consumer and business spending may be taking hold. in particular real consumer spending rose at an annual rate of 2.5% in the third quarter of 2010, and at able indicator

suggested it likely expanded at a somewhat faster pace in the fourth quarter. business investment and new equipment and software has grown robustly in recent quarters albeit from a surely low level. as firms replace aging equipment and made investments that had been delayed during the downturn. however, the housing sector remains depressed as the opening of vacant houses continue to weigh heavily on both home prices and construction, and non-residential construction is also quite week. over all the pace of economic recovery seems likely to be my resolve or in 2011 than it was in 2010. although recent indicators of spending and production have generally been encouraging, conditions in the labor market have improved only modestly at best. after the loss of nearly a .5 million jobs in 2008-2009, private payrolls expanded at an average of only about 100,000 per month in 2010. of pace barely enough to accommodate the normal increase

in the labor force and, therefore, insufficient to materially reduce the unemployment rate. on a more positive note a number of indicators of job openings and hiring plans have looked stronger in recent months and initial claims for unemployment insurance declined through november and december. notwithstanding these hopeful signs, the output growth is likely to be moderate in the next few quarters and employers reportedly still reluctant to add to payrolls. considerable time likely will be required before the unemployment rate is returned to a more normal level. persistently high unemployment by dampening household income in confidence could threaten the strength of sustainability of the recovery. moreover, roughly 40% of the unemployed have been out of work for six months or more. long-term unemployment not only opposes the exceptional hardships on the jobless and their families, but also erodes the skills of those workers and may inflict lasting damage on the employment and earnings

prospects. recent data show consumer price inflation continued to trend downward. the 12 months ending in november prices for personal consumption expenditures rose 1.0%. and inflation excluding the relatively volatile food and components which tends to be a better gauge of underlying inflation trends was only 0.8%, down from 1.7% a year earlier from about 2.5% in 2007, the year before the recession began. the downward trend in inflation over the past two years is no surprise given the low rates of resource utilization that has prevailed over that time. indeed as a result of the weak job market, wage growth has slowed along with inflation. over the 12 months ending in november average hourly earnings have risen only 1.6%. despite the decline in inflation, expectations have remained stable. for example, the rate of

inflation households expect over the next five to 10 years has measured by the thomson reuters university of michigan surveyed of consumers has remained at a narrow range over the past few years. with inflation expectations stable, those levels of resource utilization expected to remain low, inflation is likely to be subdued for some time. although it is likely economic growth will pick up this year and the unemployment rate will decline somewhat, progress toward the federal reserve statutory objectives of maximum employment and stable prices is expected to remain slow. the projections submitted by the adult market committee or of all in see, showed that notwithstanding growth in 2011 and 2012, most participants expect the unemployment rate to be close to 8% two years from now. at this rate of improvement they could take four to five more years for the job market to normalize fully. fomc participants also predicted inflation to be at historically

low levels for some time. very low rates of inflation raised several concerns. first very low inflation increases the risk that new adverse shocks pushed the economy into deflation. that is, a situation involving ongoing declines in crisis. experience showed deflation induced by economic slack can lead to extended periods of poor economic performance. indeed, even a significant proceeds risk of deflation may lead firms to be more cautious about investment and hiring. second, with short-term nominal interest rates already close to zero, declines in actual and expected inflation increase respectfully, both the real cost of certain existing debt and the expected real cost of new borrowing. by raising effective debt burdens and by inhibiting new household spending and business investment, higher real borrowing costs create a further drag on growth. finally it is important to

recognize that carries a very low inflation generally involve very slow growth in nominal wages of incomes as well as in prices. i have already alluded to the recent deceleration in average hourly earnings. in circumstances like those we face now, very low inflation or deflation does not necessarily imply any increase in household purchasing power. rather because of the associated deterioration of economic performance, very low inflation or deflation, arising from economic slack is generally lead to reductions rather than gains of living standards. in a situation which unemployment is high, expected great to remain so and inflation is unusually low, that fomc would normally respond by reducing its target for the federal funds rate. however the federal reserve target for the federal funds rate has been close to zero since december 2008 leading essentially no scope for further reductions. consequently for the past two years that fomc has been using alternative tools to provide additional monetary

accommodation. notably between december 2008 and march 2010 that fomc purchased about $1.7 trillion in longer-term treasury and agency backed securities in the open market. the proceeds of these purchases ultimately find a way to the banking system with a result of the depository institutions to hold a high level of reserve balances with the federal reserve. although longer-term securities purchasers are different tool for conducting monetary policy than the more familiar approach of managing the overnight interest rate, the goals and transmission mechanisms of the two approaches are similar. conventional monetary policy works by changing market expectations for the future path of short-term interest rates which in turn influences the current level of longer-term interest rates and other financial conditions. these changes in financial conditions and affect household and business spending. by contrast security purchases by the federal reserve put

downward pressure direct on longer-term interest rates by reducing the longer-term securities held by private investors. these actions affect private sector spending in the same channels as conventional monetary policy. in particular the federal reserve earlier program of asset purchases appeared to be successful in influencing longer-term interest rates, raising the prices of equities and other assets, and improving conditions more broadly. thereby helping stabilizing the economy and support the recovery. in light of this expense and with the economic outlook still unsatisfactory, late last summer the fomc began to signal to financial markets it was considering providing additional monetary policy accommodation by conducting further asset purchases. at its meeting in early november the appleton city formally announce its intention to purchase an additional $600 billion in treasury securities by the end of the second quarter of 2011, or about one-third the fight of securities purchased in earlier programs.

the fomc also maintained its policy adopted at its august meeting of reinvesting principal received on the federal reserve's holdings of securities. that fomc stated it will review its asset purchase program regularly invited income information and will adjust the program as needed to meet its objectives. importantly the committee remains unwavering passion and we fully committed to price stability any particular to maintaining inflation at a level consistent with the federal reserve's mandate for the congress. in that regard it bears emphasizing the federal reserve has all the tools it needs to ensure that he'll be able to smoothly and effectively exit from this program at the appropriate time. importantly the federal reserve's ability to pay interest on reserve balances held in federal reserve banks will allow it to put upward pressure on short-term market interest rates and dust tight monetary policy we needed can't even if bank reserves remain high. moreover, the fed has invested effort into developing methods to drain or immobilize bank

reserves as needed to facilitate the schools -- when conditions warrant. if necessary the committee could also tightened policy by redeeming or selling securities on the open market. as i met him before the budget committee is worth emphasizing defense purchases of longer-term security are not comparable to ordinary government spending. in executing these transactions the federal reserve requires financial assets, not goods and services. ultimately at the appropriate time the federal reserve will normalize a balance sheet by selling these assets back into the market, or by allowing them to mature. in the interim the interest of the federal reserve earns from the securities holdings as to the feds assistance to the treasury. in 2009, 2010, those remittances totaled about $120 billion. fiscal policymakers also face a challenging environment. our nation's fiscal position is

deteriorated since the onset of the financial crisis and recession. to a significant extent this deterioration is the result of the effects of the weak economy, along with the actions that were taken to these through sessions of steady financial markets but in the planning for the near-term, fiscal policymakers will need to continue to take into account the low level of economic activity and the still fragile nature of the economic recovery. however, in an important part of the federal budget deficit appears to be structural rather than cyclical. that is, the deficit is expected to be unsustainably elevated even after economic conditions have returned to normal. for example, under the cbo's so-called alternative fiscal scenario, which assumes that most of the tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003 on a permanent and that discretion as spending rises at the same rate as the gdp, the deficit is projected to fall from its current level of about 9% of gdp to 5% of gdp by

2015. rise to about 6.5 a set of gdp by the end of the decade. in subsequent years the budget outlook is projected to deteriorate even more rapidly as the aging of the population and continued growth in health spending. under this scenario federal debt held by the public is projected to reach 185% of the gdp by 2035. up from about 60% at the end of fiscal year 2010. the cbo projections by design and ignore the adverse effects of such high debt and deficits would likely have on our economy. but if government debt and deficits were to grow at the pace and vision in this scenario, the economic and financial effects would be severe. diminishing confidence in the part of investors and deficits will be brought under control would likely lead to sharply rising interest rates on government debt and potentially to broader financial turmoil. moreover, high rates of

government borrowing would drain funds with adverse long run affects the u.s. output incomes and standards of living. it is widely understood that the federal government is on unsustainable fiscal path, yet as a nation we have done little to address this critical threat to our economy. doing nothing will not be an option. the longer we wait to act, the greater the risks and the more wrenching the inevitable changes to the budget will be. by contrast the prompt adoption of a credible program to reduce future deficits would not only enhance economic growth and stability in the long run, but could also yield substantial near-term benefits in terms of lower long-term interest rates and increased consumer and business confidence. plans recently put forward by the president national commission on fiscal responsibility and reform, and other prominent groups, provide useful starting point for a much-needed national conversation about our medium and long-term fiscal situation.

although these are his proposals differ on many details, each gives a sobering perspective on the size of the problem, and offers some potential solutions. of course economic growth is affected not on by the levels of spending but also by the composition and structure. i hope that in addressing our long-term fiscal challenges, the congress will seek reforms for the government tax policies and spending priorities that serve it on to reduce the deficit, but also to enhance the long-term growth potential of our economy. for example, by encouraging investment in visit passion in fiscal and human capital, by providing necessary infrastructure and by reducing disincentives to work into safe. we cannot grow out of our fiscal imbalances, but a more productive economy would ease the trade-offs we face. thank you, mr. chairman. senator sessions. i look forward to taking a question. >> thank you for your testimony.

i want to go to your final point. that is the budget committee. we have of our colleagues, and the country to propose a fiscal policy going forward. but i hear you saying is it is quickly important that we adopt a credible plan, longer-term plan to deal with our deficits and debt. is that an accurate understanding of what you're saying to us? >> that's correct, mr. chairman. our fiscal issues are very long-term in nature. they increase the difficulties increase over time. merely addressing this your spinning is not going to solve the problem. we need to develop a plan, an incredible player, won the markets will accept as plausible to address the longer-term structural deficits that we face. >> the fiscal commission proposed a plan that would reduce the debt over time by $4 trillion, which was stabilize

the debt in the short term. but importantly bring the debt down as a share of the economy to roughly publicly held debt to 30% of gdp. that's over an extended period of time. is that about the magnitude, besides a plan that is necessary to? >> senator, no one knows exactly what the desirable debt-to-gdp ratio is in the long run. you mentioned a 90% number as an upper level of comfort. i think in the near term i think we need to focus on stabilizing the debt-to-gdp ratio. under the alternate scenario of the cbo, it just rises indefinitely and that certainly is not sustainable. if we could achieve in the next decade, two or 3% reduction, that would be sufficient to bring the primary deficit close to zero and was stabilize over the next decade. we need additional steps after

that. i think stability is the first up, bring it down as a bonus if we can do that. >> that was really the conclusion of the commission. the conclusion of the commission was, job one is to stabilize the debt. we talk about these different measures of debt. publicly held debt is currently roughly 60%. the gross debt is currently about 90%. and most of the advice to the commission was you've got to stabilize it, publicly held debt at 60%, gross debt at 90%. but over time you really need to bring it down. you shouldn't stabilize it and consider that you finish the job. because you'd need to have a margin to deal with future shocks. is that your judgment as well? >> yes, mr. chairman, but stabilize would be a very important first step. >> job one, stabilize. second question is the timing of

imposing the tough choices that need to be made here on both the spending side of equation and the commission proposed roughly to point to $2 trillion of spending cuts, propose nearly $1 trillion of new revenue. the rest of the savings was savings of interest. in terms of when you pet it that is a critical question. the commission's conclusion was you ought not to take the really tough steps that need to be taken for the next several years. you need to begin picking a to a drop -- you need to adopt a plan to cut the tough medicine needs to wait until the economy is on stronger ground. what would your recommendation be to us? >> mr. chairman, i think the issue is credibility. if we can come is not sufficient

to say we are not doing anything now because of the recession. we will do something later. not specify what that is. i think if we could adopt a credible plan that is specific enough and credible enough, to address the long run situation, that would be the most positive thing that we could do. and in doing so we could get really all the benefits without having to take actions that would endanger the very near-term recovery, which is still somewhat fragile. >> that was very much the conclusion of the commission. it's not enough to say we will do something in the sweet bye and bye. you've got to adopt a plan. you've got to put in place. you've got to put in place legislatively so people know, yeah, we are going to cut spending. we are going to improve the revenue base. we are going to shave savings of interest costs. and it's got to be credibly scored. it's got to be real. but it shouldn't, shouldn't have

the bite, a curve too soon or you endanger this fragile recovery. you made another set of comments i've that was very important. and that was the composition of the spending reductions, the composition of the revenue is also critically important for future economic growth. you are saying look, you have to pay attention to human capital, education. you've got to pay attention to infrastructure because that improves the economic competitive position of the united states. but when you are imposing the spending cuts you got to go after things that are superfluous. and goodness knows as we look across federal spending there are places that we are not doing things that enhance economic growth. there are things that constitute waste. although the idea that just cutting waste audit abuse is going to solve this problem is, i wish it were the case, but it's necessary but not

sufficient. on the revenue side, where the best things we could do is broaden the tax base, lending some of the tax expenditures. but simultaneously reducing rates to make america more competitive. is that what you had in mind when you talk about paying attention to the composition of the changes that are made? >> yes, mr. chairman. on the first point, the national income accounts don't distinguish between government consumption and investment very sharply. there is a technical distinction. we need to think about making investments for the future as opposed to simply spending our seed corn on current needs. so thinking about government programs, we should ask the question will this provide benefits in the future, provide more productive competitive economy in the future. on the attack site i don't think it's controversial among economists that rising rates combined with multiplication of extension, productions, credits

and so on leads to a tax cut which is very complex and can distort economic decisions. i think all of the major deficit reduction committees have taken the opportunity to talk about the need to lower rates but a low, close the loophole so as not lose revenue. so i think that is something i hope the congress will talk about. if not at all, to address the long-term deficit issues but also to think about making our tax code and our spending priorities more friendly. >> i will take, there's nobody that can participate in this process that didn't include this tax system that we have is just completely outdated. you know, it does not take account of the world that we live in today. the other conclusion of the commission was that you've got to everything on the table.

spending, revenue, and every part of federal spending has to be dealt with. and you know, even defense. one of the most startling, i received my colleagues, one of the most startling pieces of information that came to the commission was 51% of the federal workforce, is the department of defense. that does not count contractors. when we asked the defense analysts who came before the commission how many contractors does the department of defense have, they told us they couldn't tell us. not because it was secret. it's because they did not know. when we asked them what was the range. they said between one and 9 million. that's a pretty broad range. so we've got issues throughout the federal government that we will have to address. i very much appreciate the good advice that you've given us. senator sessions.

>> by the way, we're going with eight minute rounds. a little bit longer than usual because of the numbers who are here. and i've tried to respect that in my time, and help others as well. >> thank you, mr. chairman. first, mr. bernanke, let me pursue the question that revolves around your confidence about being able to prevent inflation. you note that you remain unwavering committed to price stability in your statement. and in particular maintain inflation at a level consistent with the federal reserve's mandate. in that regard it bears emphasizing that the federal reserve is all the tool it needs to ensure that it will be smoothly and effectively exit from this program at the appropriate time. well, forgive me if i am less confident.

that you know precisely when and how to exit. and if you can do so smoothly. and i noted that the bond market and the comment seems almost in consensus view now around wall street and investors. bonds are bad investment, that presumably because they can affect a realistic reality of an increase in interest rates in the future, as a result of quantitative easing, deficit and the like. can you assure us? it looks to me like, wouldn't you agree, that investors are getting nervous already. >> senator, first on your earlier comment about the 100% certainty, what i was talking about there wasn't that we would know exactly with certainty the right moment. what i was trying to convey was i thought i was certain that we have the tools we need.

it's always the case that we are reversing monetary policy in a period of growth that it's a matter of judgment you can be too early, too late. that is to for normal monetary policy as those unusual monetary policy. so i'm not try to claim our missions. and, of course, it does possible that we'll be either a little too slow or a little too quick, and we would do are very, very best to move at the right time. as far as inflation is concerned though, again and the actual inflation rate is at essentially a postwar low. and inflation expectations look very stable. >> what about ,-comthem is their difference between interest rates on the federal debt and inflation? >> the interest rates on the federal debt are also quite low, of course. in the index bond market the breakeven inflation rates are about what you think they want to be if people expect that over the next five to 10 years the fed will keep inflation at about 2% which is about where we think we got to be aiming.

we will pay close attention to the inflation situation, and we take that very, very seriously. >> but tell me just, trying to be, bring a little common sense to an honest question to you, it does seem that the bond market is nervous. it does seem to me that the quantitative easing plan continued and they continue again. and that the deficit continues. at an unsustainable rate. why shouldn't people be worried that eventually there could be a tipping point reached in a rather dramatic surge in our interest rates would occur? >> on the monetary policy side, as i said we are in a situation similar to where we always are, which is we need to find the right moment to begin tightening. you mentioned the bond market is expected short-term rates to rise in the future. that would be corresponding to

the fed tightening and reversing the easy money policies. on terms of fiscal side, there i agree with you. i think that if congress and the administration don't find a credible plan for controlling new long-term structural deficits, there could be very serious problems in financial markets, and inflation. that's the history of many, many situations in the past. so i do very much urge this committee to look forward strong and credible actions to control the federal debt. if that is done, then i don't think that inflation will be a long-term problem and what we are trying to do i think in the short term is to create an appropriate balance between the risks of inflation and the risks of deflation which have not yet gone. >> with regard to unemployment i think you made clear in your statement, but it's important

for us to understand and even though the rate dropped three tens, four-tenths, 9.4, the 100,000 jobs, 103,000 jobs added is really sort of treading water about what you have to have to just maintain the current employment rate, is that not right, and that's not really a number that we can celebrate today? >> it's about what we expected, but as you say it's not a number that is going to come if we continue at this pace we will not see sustained decline in the unemployment rate. >> my predictions were as much as 275,000 jobs being added. >> i was serving on our prediction and certainly not most wall street predictions. there was a number that came out of so-called adp number which was very high. but that is only loosely connected with the actual numb number.

>> i think the american people are deeply concerned about we -- about where we're headed economically. their jobs are at stake. i believe that's a legitimate concern. to what extent do you have, a plan, and to what extent do you have does the administration, the president have a plan that sees into the future and it says we're going to do a b. c. and d., and those things will bring us out of this? and is it written, can we see at? >> center, first of all, -- senator, first of all it was concerned about the failure of unemployment to decline that motivated us back in august and september to adopt more monetary accommodation. in my view is we've already had some benefits from that. we have seen some improvements in the outlook. we've seen some improvements in the financial markets. that is part of what we're trying to do is try to keep this recovery going.

in addition of course we are working very hard and our role as a regular to try to improve the availability of credit to small businesses and to other borrowers. senator warner i know is interested in that issue. we are working very hard. that's our top priority. >> well, we've got a changeover in the white house. mr. summers is gone. peter orszag left. we've got a new chief of staff. i hear today. but i don't sense anywhere in our government that we have the kind of clarity of leadership we had under mr. volcker, when we had a crisis in the late '70s and early '80s your one of the fed members said we knew we were doing the right thing. they were protesting mr. volcker. some called for his resignation.

we had a plan and we were staying with it. the american people have confidence that you and the administration on the same page. we have a plan other than reacting ever -- every month or two to some new changing condition. >> the federal reserve is independent of the administration. we tried to coordinate with the administration, tried to courtney with congress. the federal reserve is independent. so the administrations plan and the congress this plan, those are not our province. that's what the administration and congress to decide. in our case we do have a plan, and i have tremendous respect for chairman volcker. one of the things he did as you say is he did what he thought was right even though there is a lot of criticism. i think that's the importance of independent monetary policy is eric at the federal reserve we recognize that there are different views, but we are trying to do the best thing we can for the american economy.

that's the beauty of having an independent central bank's. thank you much. mr. volcker, history records i think was correct in his plan. i hope history will record the same for your leadership. >> thanks, senator sessions. let me just indicate that on our side, senator wyden, senator manchin, senator stabenow, senator merkley. republican cited senator enzi, senator corker. senator wyden. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i too want to welcome the senator sessions as our ranking minority member. he is someone i greatly enjoyed working with, respect very much. i do want to note for the record that i don't believe the auburn tigers have a realistic chance of keeping up with the university of oregon's fast-moving, innovative offense in the championship game at but we will say that for another

discussion. i just want to welcome my good friend. >> you're correct in that i would be pleased to wear that tie you have on, for a few days perhaps. >> we have an agreement and i will reciprocate. senator conrad, thank you very much. thank you we are so glad to have you here. and i especially, because you and i share similar views, this big idea for economic growth in our country is fundamental tax reform, where you go in there and clean out this job killing, thoroughly discredited mess. and you address that i thought very well on 60 minutes discussion that you had back in december. here's my first question. it was clear at the end of the year that you had to take some steps with respect to the tax code in the