is in the hands of particularly the department of interior and administration to execute. and from the comments we have had thus far from the obama administration, i am very hopeful they will take advantage of that opportunity. >> let me add to things. the congress can reorganize the department of interior to make a safety enterprise totally walled off from general -- revenue generation. that can be done. it does not involve more regulation. that is as simple initiative they can take. we think it will be a guarantor in the future against revenue driving this program. we document through several of ministration's that it has. german upton, a german hastings, chairman hastings and

bingaming have allnm expressed interest and we believe will follow through with the recommendations. >> i wanted to ask you guys to talk about the recommendations you made with regard to epa. it seems after an event happened. was there any sense of given them a more up front role rather than leaving everything after the incident? >> the va has a national response center and has a role in preparing for any response. we believe there are structural changes that need to be done with respect to the area wide councils, and those are detailed in the report. one of the real surprises here, to me, is having overseen much of the response to exxon valdez

in 1989, the status of the dispersant question was still unresolved. i did not permit the dispersant to be in many of the sensitive areas because of fear that getting into the water column will contaminate the fish. remarkable to me that we finally have a spill, and they are predictable, that we then have the argument about whether it is toxic? does it persist in the environment? does it depend how deep it is injected or how much is? we make strong recommendations that epa seriously begin to test toxics, the toxicity of dispersants and their effectiveness, and to do so in real time situations. i can perfectly well understand why you when an application may go in through epa to deposit oil

on the water and see whether something works to contain it or dissolve it, that is probably ot left at the top of in bobox, nevertheless we think it needs to be done. particularly recommended be done in the arctic to find out how it would work in the icy waters. >> it has a major role to play in restoration efforts and recommendations that we have made and the secretary made. as you are aware, the president has asked the administrator lee said jackson to head a task force. she has been set up to make progress in an interim basis. she is leading that effort involving other agencies and the states. they will have a major role to play and the restoration

programs. specifically one of the areas we point out is the alleviation of the so-called dead zone in the gulf of mexico. this has to involve management and regulation and pollution sources. it is an area much larger than was actually affected by this oil spill on an annual basis. if we're going to restore the resilience of the gulf oil spill, this is one area we should undertake in this restoration efforts, and the epa has a leadership role in that regard. >> to be clear and contrary to my initial assumption going into the issue, we believe secretary jackson made a quite sound decision in the way to use dispersants in the way that she did. >>

>> thank you. i'm from blue bird news. the recommendation, how does this compare to how secretary salazar said we will do? >> secretary saws are made recommendations that are in direct response to the kinds of concerns that we have. he has now made separate leasing and revenue generation and a report to two separate secretaries. we respect that move. we think it is not enough. those two secretaries still report to racing will separate it -- deputy secretary and that deputy secretary reports to the secretary. we are supposing that there be a walled off enterprise that is headed by someone who is appointed for a term, someone who has industry knowledge or experience, engineering capability and training, and

cannot be removed or politically interfered with. we think for the long term, that is the only way to ensure that revenues do not again become excessively influential in decisions relating to non- revenue items such as the safety and environment. yes, ma'am? >> i am with reuters. i was wondering, with all of the additional regulations i you are calling for and things of that nature, is there any concern about further delays in the gulf? already, there are complaints that there have not been deepwater drilling permits and that drilling could be delayed until next year. is that something you took into consideration when you were planning for it, and is it a concern now? >> senator gramm? >> yes, we did take into account. as commissioner by niki just

mentioned, we recommended an increase of time that the department of interior agency should have to reviewe applications, but it was not an indefinite amount of time. it was 30 to 60 days. we are sensitive to the fact that there are costs, both financial costs and time costs, involved in these decisions. but think of the enormous liability that the industry has just brought upon itself as a result of the failure of -- failure to attend to the basic safeties, and thus, deepwater rise in. we think that the long-term viability of the industry in the gulf and its economic successes in the gulf are very closely tied to a new standard of safety and environmental protection,

which is what our report will, i think, establish a path toward bree -- toward achieving. >> we will take couple of more. yes, sir? >> john kingston from plats. how do you deal with the fact that if they hired a regulator, someone who understands the industry, the compensation package will never be on the level that the private industry can pay for and then presumably take that person away from boem. >> i will tell you two ways. the we've got to get the competition of for those highly trained, special-specialty, technical people. it is possible there are other agencies, like nasa, that have a pay scale that permit that. whether we can get it up to a level comparable to that of industry remains to be seen, but

that is one thing that i think the regulator can be helped by having a safety institute with industry people who are evaluating, auditing and inspecting, and who do have comparable compensation, as in the nuclear power industry. the people in the nonprofit industry that the industry has set up are every bit as eligible for pay also as those who are in the inspecting. and enforced regular will give us much more protection. >> in fact, i think the united states is the exception to the role. the fact is that most of the countries where there is a substantial amount of oil and gas exploration do compensate their professional regulators at a level that would allow them

not to be out man. and interestingly, in great britain it has been said that if there is one issue that ignites -- that unites the industry, it is the desire to have that strong, professional regulation, because the industry understands that it -- that its continued success, particularly in the north sea, is a direct function of how well it performs and that is, in turn, directed -- affected directly by the quality of regulation. >> last question. >> bill gibson with the sunset. please forgive me if you have covered this. what are the lessons learned from this experience in terms of allowing areas in which oil drilling should be expanded? should it be brought closer to florida's shores? >> [laughter] you are now asking me but a

policy in a parochial question. -- both a policy and a parochial question. i believe one of the issues that this has raised is the issue of the future of energy policy in the united states. at the current level of proven reserves and at our annual consumption of petroleum if america were to go to a drill- baby-drill philosophy, we would exhaust our reserves by approximately 2031. if we continue at the current of using 48% domestic and 52% imported, we will stretched that to the year 2068. i think that those numbers indicate the imperatives of having as part of our energy policy that we need to be

holding back some areas that have potential for future generations. and the absolute imperative of moving aggressively toward reducing america's almost insatiable appetite for petroleum, and appetite which today is consuming 22% of all sea,petroleum from the north africa, australia, as well as the united states. we're using 22% of it. those numbers are not sustainable and i believe our policy toward reaching out to areas that are not currently being exploited has to be within that context. >> and effective summary and conclusion airey statement. >> thank you.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] c-span2 [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> in a few moments, chris christie is a state address followed by the annual address and the state legislature proposed. after that, a state department

briefing. later, the head of the u.s. chamber of commerce on the outlook for the year. it is time to upload your videos for the studentcam documentary competition. >> chris christie said he will not raise taxes on the next budget. he will focus on education. this is about 40 minutes per

th. >> thank you. thank you burd. i like to ask you to rise for a moment. we had an extraordinary tragedy this week in america burd. like to take a moment of a silent prayer. giffords and the other victims, and also for the

family and friends of those whose lives were lost, including a native of new jersey. let's take a moment of silent reflection and prayer for their recovery and help them through their grief. thank you all very much. the 10th governor 1 dongle. madam speaker. mr. president. members of the legislature. and the citizens of the state of new jersey. it is my constitutional duty to report to you each year on the year that has passed and on the state of our state. today, it is my privilege to report to you that the state of our state is improving, getting

better every day. [applause] why do i say that? state spending is down 9% in one year. the budget has been balanced. state taxes are lower for the first time in a decade. the unemployment rate has begun to drop, and today is below, not above, the national average. companies are beginning to take a second look at new jersey. together we have begun to does something no one thought was possible. we are beginning -- we are turning our state around. [applause]

without a doubt, there is much work still be dead. but we cannot turn back now. new jersey is coming back. one year ago the fiscal year 2010 budget was over $2 billion in deficit with the year more than half gone and our options shrinking fast. the state was actually in danger of running out of cash, within weeks of not being able to meet payroll. we faced a deficit that was projected to be $11 billion, equal to 37% of the budget, the largest deficit in proportional terms in the country. property taxes had risen 70% in the last 10 years. independent analysts concluded we had the highest overall tax burden in america. unemployment was at 10%, the highest in interaction, -- the

highest in a generation, in the region, and above the national average. wealth and jobs and people were leaving the state. the new jersey we love, the new jersey of our youth, but was in danger of slipping away. some were beginning to write off new jersey. doubting we could change what the newspapers called our old, hide-bound ways. back then, the state's largest newspaper opined, taxes are too high as it is. another paper put it simply, new jersey must change course. the day of reckoning has arrived and arrived with a vengeance. we had a clear choice, to continue our reckless ways or change course and choose a new, difficult path, one that would require real political courage from all those who embraced the change.

well, we did change course decisively. today, step by step, we are putting ourselves on a better, more sustainable path and pushing ahead on the road to growth. step one was to turn trenton upside down. to reverse the pattern of increased spending and taxing, to upend the culture of burying problems instead of facing them. his seat, the right answer is to face big problems now -- you see, the right answer is to face big problems now or face bigger ones tomorrow. i believe in a culture of truth. it has not always been easy because some of those troops were not pleasant. but at the same time, everyone knew that the old direction was driving our state off a cliff into the abyss of no growth, high unemployment, and a fleeing population. but we did begin by turning the

mindset of trenton around, and today with your help new jersey's comeback has begun. [applause] the last year may have seemed like a long and winding road, but together we have actually changed direction quickly. but it what is happening just the last 12 months. within three weeks of taking office, we took immediate action to prevent of financial crisis and stabilize the state's finances. we balanced that fiscal year 2010 budget by holding back what spending could be stopped, and averted new jersey's cash crisis. we enacted the first deaths in reforming our system of pensions and benefits, saving state and local taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

we enacted legislation to head off the looming crisis in our unemployment insurance system, preventing a tax increase of as much as $700 per employee for many employers. we made a down payment, with unanimous support in the legislature, by the way, on an education reform package which created a permanent interdistrict public to protect public school choice program. we approved 6 new charter schools in new jersey, a small first up, but with many more to come. and sen. the past of fiscal 2011 budget which restored some sense of fiscal sanity. it required spending cuts from every department of state government, but we closed that $11 billion budget gap without raising taxes on the people of new jersey. [applause]

bus importantly we took action on the problem which the people of new jersey had been crying not for us to solve, the growth of their property taxes. we capped that growth at 2% per year. then we made the cap real by limiting interest arbitration role -- interest arbitration awards to 2% as well. new jersey has gone from being a basket case to being a national model. the same newspapers that thought we were in deep trouble are now telling a very different story. one said, we have taken the first death in a very new direction. another now says, new jersey is setting a national example. so make no mistake -- other states are watching what we do here. will we turn back because the road is too hard? or will we press on because the

future is too important? new jersey is getting recognized for taking on the tough issues that other politicians have refused to touch. we are showing other states that sometimes, to create real change, you've got to go all in and show little jersey attitude. -- show a little jersey attitude. [applause] and this month, new governors are taking office across the country, republicans and democrats, using new jersey as the example of how they want to lead. the stakes are high. for example illinois has chosen a very different path benares. they are in the throes of debating a 75% increase in income tax rates.

is that what we want for new jersey? no. new jersey intends to remain the leader, not only in turning around the national trend of out-of-control spending and taxes, but in finding the path to growth. on every one of these topics we have more and bigger things to do. we need to balance the budget again. we need to put the unemployment insurance fund on a long-term sustainable path. we need much bigger and bolder education reform and we need steps to save our pension system. and we need to enact the entire tool kit which will help us stem the growth of property taxes. so have no doubt -- we are not turning back, not on my watch. [applause]

before i turn to the future, to the task ahead, i want to make two comments. first, who would have thunk it? if five or the senate president or the speaker had told you a year ago that by december we would have a 2% hard cap on property taxes and a 2% hard cap on interest arbitration awards, you would of sold all three of us we were crazy. here we are with both caps in law. [applause] how did this happen? people stood up for their principles on the one hand, but listened to the people who sent us here on the other. that is the model for the way forward. we must fight hard for what we

believe in, but in the end, we must do the people's work. by second comment is to say to this legislature and to the public watching or listening today, thank you. we have not always agreed and we have not always gotten exactly what we wanted, but we have achieved compromise and the people of new jersey are better off as a result. one year ago at my inauguration, i invited the senate president and the speaker to engage in a symbolic handshake of cooperation -- a commitment to worry less about who is getting credit and more about doing something worth getting credit for. today i want to thank these people both for using this last year of action to begin to restore the public's faith in bipartisan government. thank you both.

the change we are working to achieve for new jersey is transformational. so far we have changed the terms of the debate. you know a lot has changed when the people of the state vote down a record number of school budgets even though 70% of the money in school a elections was spent by the teachers union advocating even higher spending. you know the debate has changed when my friends across the aisle propose legislation and adopt legislation highlighting the need for tax cuts to stimulate economic growth. a year ago they were advocating tax increases. you know our direction has changed when the teachers union starts talking about tenure reform. and you know the world as change when we can come together and

actually begin to reform the pension and benefit system in a nearly unanimous vote last march. so there can be no question -- the debate in trenton has changed. we have turned trenton upside down. [applause] but now we cannot -- we must take the next set. we must make even bigger changes if new jersey is to be a place where families can choose to live and work and can afford to live and work. it is traditional in state of the state messages to provide a long list of initiatives for the year ahead, to touch on every plan for every department of state government. it will come as no shock to all of you that today i am going to break with that tradition. i want to highlight not the

small things, but the major challenges that our state has ignored for too long and now we must confront now. for new jersey, it is time to do the big things. for this year, the biggest things fall in three categories. one, we must take to the course of fiscal discipline. two, we must fix our pension and health benefit system in order save them. and three, we must reform our schools to make them the best in the neck -- in america. on these three, what is at stake is no less than the future of new jersey. you see, we are in a global competition, and you know we are in a competition among the states. if we cannot shed regulations, reduce spending, and hold the line on taxes, we cannot attract and create the jobs our citizens so desperately need. if we cannot make the promises of our pension system more

realistic, there will be no pensions for those who have earned them. and if we cannot repair our schools, our people will not be ready for the jobs of the future. so our work, ladies and gentlemen, is far from finished. here is where we must go in 2011. on the big things, the things that really matter. first, we must continue the process of getting our fiscal house in order. we did achieve balance in fiscal year 2011, but our long-term deficit problem is far from solved. it took years, indeed decades, to build up, so it cannot be solved in one year. so let's be clear. we cannot continue to spend money we do not have. we cannot print money and we cannot run deficits. so we have to continue to make some very tough decisions about

what we can afford and what we cannot. next month, i will present to you my budget for fiscal year 2012. i will guarantee you this, if it will be balanced, and it will not raise taxes. [applause] now one order for that to be true, we need to better control our medicaid and health care costs. we need to continue to examine the amount and structure of municipal and school aid programs. and we need every department of state government to start from the bottom up and plan not what they want to cut from last year,

but to advocate only what they absolutely must fund for this year. when i talk of controlling spending, i am doing it for a reason. i am not proposing to cut spending just for cutting s sake. i am fighting this fight because we have to be truthful about what we cannot afford, whether it is health and pension benefits which are out of line with the rest of the country, or a tunnel which we simply cannot pay for. i am asking for shared sacrifice so that when we leave here, new jersey will be more fiscally sound than when we got here. i am asking for shared sacrifice in cutting what we do not need so that we can invest in what we absolutely do need. last week, former governor kean submitted the report of his commission on higher education in which he made clear that our system of colleges and universities are essential to our economic growth. governor kean was right and i

thank him for his commissioner'' report. i also last week outlined needed plans for continuing to invest in new jersey's transportation infrastructure, which we need to be world-class for both jobs and competitiveness. but if we are to fund these investments in the future, we have to control the costs in other programs. we need to make cuts in programs that have been shown not to work in order to make investments that will build a more productive tomorrow. some people say that getting spending under control and reforming the budget is the third rail of politics. i am here to tell you i am not afraid to touch it, in fact i embrace it, because it has been said, opportunity expands in proportion to ones courage. i am asking you to join me in cutting the popular in order to fund the necessary. and i will go further than that. it is one thing just to say no to higher taxes after decades of

tax increases, 115 in the last 10 years alone. if new jersey is it truly become a home for growth, we need to reform the taxes we place on business and individuals and we need to begin to roll them back. so any comprehensive tax reform, and by that i mean changes that are considered together, not in a piecemeal approach. in my budget next month, i will propose the initial installment of such a package. but let's be clear -- we will not put in place tax cuts that we cannot pay for. any economic incentive package that i will sign will be

enacted in that context, and only in that context, the context of a constitutionally balanced budget. the second big issue we must tackle this year is our antiquated and unsustainable pension and benefit system. this cloud hangs over us and almost every other state in the union. it is one of the reasons new jerseyans pay the highest property taxes in america. bill is 75% -- 3 out of $4 of our state's municipal and county budgets are driven by personnel and labor costs. but without the reform, pension and health care benefit costs will increase by more than 40% over the next four years. without reform, the unfunded liability of our pension system will grow, from $54 billion today to a staggering $183

billion within 30 years. without reform, the required annual pension contribution by the state will grow to over $13 billion annual over the same time period. but put that in perspective. $13 billion a year. that is more than the state now spends each year on its entire system of public education. in pension and benefit costs. the choice is clear -- reform today or risk a disaster tomorrow. without reform, the beneficiaries of the system face a high risk of catastrophe which would place all of their benefits at risk. so again i am not proposing pension and benefit reforms just to be tight-fisted. i am proposing pension reform for the police officers who have served and the chair did for many years, but who may find

nothing when they retire a decade from now. i am proposing pension reform for the firefighters who every day put their lives on the line to serve the public and have the right to expect that when the time comes, the public will serve them. i am proposing pension reform for the teachers who put in the extra hours every day to help their students. we now must put in the extra hours to ensure the system is -- the system is solvent for them. the pension and benefit reforms have put forward are sensible and straightforward. we must modestly raise the retirement age in an era of longer life expectancy. we must curb the effect of cola's's in the time of low or no inflation. we must ensure a modest but acceptable contribution from employees toward their own retirement system. and finally, if we can make real reform a reality, the state must

also began to make its pension contributions. without reform, the problem we face is simple. benefits are too rich, contributions are too small, and the system is on a path to bankruptcy. a recent independent study found that the pension funds of 11 states will be out of money by 2020, just 9 years from today. new jersey is one of those states. that is an unacceptable outcome to me. so to every beneficiary of the system, i am fighting for your pension's existence.

and for the member of the legislature, i say, please join me in doing so. now as a part of negotiation on interest arbitration, the leadership of the legislature promised to take up this necessary package of pension and benefit reforms. now's the time for us to finish what we started last march. we should pass this package now. and if you do, i will immediately sign it into law. the third critical action item for this year, perhaps the biggest thing of all, is education reform. we cannot ask children and families stuck in chronically failing public schools to wait any longer. it is not acceptable that a child who is neglected in a new jersey school must accept it because of their zip code.

we must give parents and children a choice to attend better schools. now why do i say this? let me tell you a story. at the years ago, as the united states attorney, i visited the robert trent academy in newark. like those in many charter schools, a slots in this charter school -- because it has been so successful, and because we do not have enough charter schools -- are limited. so the slots are allocated by lottery. near the end of my visit, i asked a mother of one of the students how she felt on the night her son was in the lottery. the way she framed the issue was so simple and in so many ways tragic. she told me, whether her son was chosen for the lottery meant the difference between him going to college or going to jail. that is what she believed.

over 100,000 students just like that one are trapped in nearly 200 failing public schools in the state. this is an awful situation, it is obscene, it is unacceptable in new jersey, and we must change it now. phfft we made some progress this year with the interdistrict choice bill, with the expansion of charter schools, and with mark zucker per's landmark $100 million gift to newark.

i want to thank mark zuckerberg, and i look forward to continuing my work with mayor cory booker to reform newark schools. we've got a lot " -- we have got a lot of work to do, cory. but we need to tell those children and their families, trapped in these failing schools, that we are coming. so before this legislature goes home for the political season, we need to give them more help toward improvement, more hope, and more choice. our commitment to these principles is why i have asked, and i am honored to have, my friend, former d.c. schools chancellor, michelle rhee in the chamber today.

no one in america has been more clear that we must change our public education system from one that caters to the feelings of adults to one that prepares our children for the 21st century. michelle, thanks for coming today, and i want you to count new jersey among those who like you are finally putting students first. thank you, michelle. we must expand the charter school program beyond the six we approved this year and the 73 operating in new jersey. that is a top priority. i am ready to work with you to attract the best charter school operators in america to new

jersey. to increase our authorizing capacity so they can store more tour schools here. to implement the interdistrict school " choice law we passed last year. and to send help now to a children and their families in failing schools by finally passing the bi-partisan opportunity scholarship act without any further delay. overall, statewide per pupil spending in new jersey is the highest in the nation, at over $17,600 per student. but our results in terms of achievement are not number one, and they are not uniformly excellent or in many cases even acceptable. in multiple categories and at

multiple grade levels, the gap between at-risk students and those not at risk have not changed little in years, and it is way too high. now we must end the myth that more money equals better achievement. it is a failed legal theory, and we can no longer waste our children's time or the public's money waiting for it to work. we're running out of time. we are running out of time. the time for real reform is now. here's what we have to do. first, we must empower principals. second, we must reform poor- performing public schools or we must close them.

we must cut out classroom costs and focus our efforts on teachers and children. i propose that we reward the best teachers based on merit at the individual teacher level. i demand that layoffs, when they occur, be based on a merit system and not merely on seniority. i am committed to improving the measurement and evaluation of teachers, and i have an expert task force of teachers, principals, and administrators working on that issue right now. and perhaps the most important step in that process is to give schools more power to remove underperforming teachers. the time for a national conversation on tenure is long past due. teaching that no longer be the only profession where you have no rewards for excellence and no consequences for failure. but new jersey lead the re again. the time to eliminate teacher tenure is now.

let's be frank. these issues are difficult. the process of cutting the budget, of being realistic about pension and health benefits, and of reforming our schools will get harder before the results make them seem easy. no doubt in the months ahead, we will have to fight. some might even say that i have been too ready for a fight. [laughter] that my approach has been too tough or too combative. i've heard that somewhere. but that is for reason. it is because the fight is important. it is vital.

the reality is i will fight when it matters. it matters because i have seen what so many new jersey families are dealing with every day. for them this is not about politics. this is about their life. i fight when the issues are big, when it matters the most. sometimes that means we will not agree. sometimes you will oppose my proposals and sometimes i will oppose yours. sometimes i might even be the one of your bills. but when i do so, rest assured it will be because i genuinely believe it is in the best interest of the people of new jersey. 150 years ago, after his election and before his inauguration, abraham lincoln spoke here in this building, in

the statehouse in trenton. on that day, speaking to a legislature controlled by the other party, lincoln said this. it may be necessary to put the foot down firmly. and if i do my duty and do right, you will sustain me, will you not? receive design them by the members of the legislature, the majority of whom do not agree me in -- i agree with me in political sentiments, i trust that i may have their assistance in piloting the ship of state through this voyage, surrounded by perils as it is. for if it should suffer attack now, there will be no pilot ever needed for another voyage. our challenges are different today, but our resolve and must be the same. then as now, what is at stake is our future. 22 years ago, another american leader spoke to his people.

famously he was about big things. he focused on major change in the direction of the country. it was ronald reagan, one of my personal heroes come and on this day in 1989 he gave his farewell address to the nation. he talked about america standing for freedom, not for the first time, but rediscovering it. let me tell you -- that is what is going on in new jersey right now. we are rediscovering it. we do not have to reinvent our state. we already have a diverse and highly educated work force, a phenomenal pace of infrastructure, and a state with physical beauty and tremendous talent. today we in new jersey must rediscover our strengths and put them to work on behalf of our people. reagan also pointed out in that speech that once you begin a great movement, there is no telling where it will in. in the last year, we have begun

a new movement in new jersey, of movement back to our roots, back to economic dynamism and growth, back to pride in our state. now we cannot say today where it will lead and all they will come of it. but we know that the path of change is better than the path of stagnation that we were on. i was determined when i took the oath of this office to give the people and nonsense but -- an honest assessment of our problems. to tell them the truth even if it was difficult and my proposed solutions or at times unpopular. and this day i ask that i be measured by the standard. i always did what i said i was going to do. [applause]

i may not offer the easiest course, but i will be direct in sing which course i believe is best. our nation and our state face major challenges ahead. but those of us entrusted to serve the public have the chance to stand up and fight for what really needs to be done at this critical time in our history. so today, we cannot turn back. we owe it to the people of new jersey to press on, to fight hard when it really matters and to work every die create a real hope for a brighter future. for president reagan spoke of america as a shining city on a hill. i believe new jersey can once again be a beacon, a national leader in everything from economic growth to education and a wonderful place to

prosper, to run a business and raise the family. and my commitment to you today is to fight alongside each and every one of you to make it so. thank you. god bless new jersey, and god bless america. [applause] [applause]

im [applause] [applause] [applause]

[applause]

>> here is a historic speeches and eyewitness accounts. top history professors and historians still limits to america's past. it is all we can, every weekend on c-span3. now a state appellate union address.

>> : members of the joint assembly, purchase saourpbt to section 13 of article 15 of the indiana constitution, the indiana general assembly is convened for the purpose of hearing a governor. ladies and gentlemen of the house and senate, distinguished guests i have the high honor of introducing our governor, michiga mitch daniels [applause] phraus

>>: mr. speaker, members of the assembly, hoosier friends and neighbors, thank you yet again for the privilege of this platform. for most of us, one of the strongest memories of our youth is that great school teacher, that magical man or woman who somehow reached us, and stretched us, and in the process left indelible recollections. for me, one of those was bob watson -- still today, mr. watson to me -- who

introduced us to mysteries of the periodic table in high school chemistry. in addition to mixing potions that suddenly turned purple, and terrifying pop quizzes, mr. watson was famous for his aphorisms, little sayings so often repeated that his students still smile and recite them to each other decades later. and the most frequently applied of all of watson's wisdom was: "good things come to those who wait. patience is the essence of life." patience does not come easily to a teenager -- or to adults, for that matter. at the grocery store, the airport scanner, or the bmv, none of us likes to wait. like all americans, hoosiers are waiting tonight for a national economic recovery. far too many are without work and, even worse than their number, is how long

many have been waiting, waiting for that next job, waiting for the basic human fulfillment of knowing you are standing on your own feet, providing for yourself and your family. the deep frustration of unemployed hoosiers is shared by those of us charged with public duties in these times. the best efforts of our state, or any one state to break free of recession's suffocating clutch are never adequate, and we can't wait for better times. building one of the best job climates in the country isn't enough. breaking the all-time record for new job commitments isn't enough. adding new jobs at twice the national average isn't enough. we did all those things in 2010, but it couldn't offset the terrible drag of a national economic ebbtide that continues to leave too many boats stuck in the muck. we hoosiers don't like to wait when we can act. if we cannot

overcome a nationwide job hemorrhage, we can fight back better than others. again in 2010, we broke all records for road building and bridge building, for the fourth year in a row, and put thousands to work doing so. as the final installment of our 2008 property tax cuts took effect, hard-pressed hoosier home and business owners found an additional $600 million still in their bank accounts. tonight, because of our action, indiana's property taxes are the lowest anywhere in america. and thanks to a ringing 72 percent verdict by our fellow citizens, who voted in a referendum to protect those cuts in our constitution, they're going to stay that way.

[applause] and in the clearest example of hoosier resolve, we handled a two-billion dollar drop in state revenues as any family would, as any small business would. we decided what is most important, separated the "must do's" from the "nice-to-do's," and matched spending to income. across the country, state spending, despite the recession, is still up sharply the last six years. but here, it is virtually flat, one-third the rate of inflation. elsewhere, state government payrolls have grown, but here, we have the nation's fewest state employees per capita, fewer than we did in 1978. during this terrible recession, at least 35 states raised taxes, but indiana cut them. since '04, the other 49 states

added to their debt, by 40 percent. we paid ours down by 40 percent. many states exhausted any reserves they may have had, and plunged into the red, but our savings account remains strong, and our credit is aaa. what we did in 2008, and 2009, and 2010, we will do again this year. we will take the action necessary to limit state spending to the funds available. we will protect struggling taxpayers against the additional burden of higher taxes. we will continue improving our jobs climate by holding the line on taxes as our competitors take the easy way and let theirs rise. we say tonight, whatever course others may choose, here in indiana we live within our means. we put the private sector ahead of government, and the taxpayer ahead of everyone, and we will stay in the black,

whatever it takes. in two days, i will send to this assembly a proposed budget for the next biennium. as always, i know that our final product will be a mutual one, and i welcome your amendments and improvements so long as they live up to the following principles: one, i just mentioned, no tax increases. can i get an "amen" to that? [applause] two, we must stay in the black at all times with positive reserves at a prudent level throughout the time period. three, the budget must come into structural balance,

meaning that no later than its second year, annual revenues must exceed annual spending, with no need for any use of our savings account. four, no gimmicks. we put an end to practices like raiding teacher pension funds, and shifting state deficits to our schools and universities by making them wait until the state had the cash to pay them. that's a form of waiting we should never impose again. and to hasten the return of an even stronger fiscal position, i again ask you to vote for lasting spending discipline by enacting an automatic taxpayer refund. when the day comes again when state reserves exceed 10 percent of annual needs, it will be time to stop collecting taxes and leave them with the people they belong to. remember what the hoosier philosopher said: "it's tainted money. 'taint yours, and 'taint mine." beyond some

point, it is far better to leave dollars in the pockets of those who earned them than to let them burn a hole, as they always do, in the pockets of government. doing the people's business while living within the people's means is our fundamental duty in public service. redrawing our legislative lines without gerrymandering, and adjusting an out-of-balance unemployment insurance system, are other examples of duties we must meet this year. i know you'll do so, head on. so we had a little election last november. it changed a few things, like the seating arrangement in this chamber. one thing it didn't change at all: our common duty

to take every action possible to make this a better state, a more progressive state, a standout and a special and distinctive state. that election, like all elections, was not a victory for one side. it was an instruction to us all. it was not an endorsement of a political party. it was an assignment to everyone present. by itself, it accomplished nothing, but it threw open the door to great accomplishment. starting tonight, we must step through that door, together. one opportunity lies in reform of our criminal justice system. helped by the nation's most respected experts, a bipartisan task force of police, judges, prosecutors, and others fashioned a package of changes to see that lawbreakers are incarcerated in a smarter way, one that matches their place of punishment to their true danger to society. we can be tougher on the worst offenders and

protect hoosiers more securely, while saving a billion dollars the next few years. let's seize this opportunity, without waiting. two years ago, the bipartisan commission led by two of indiana's most admired leaders presented to us a blueprint to bring indiana local government out of the pioneer days in which it was created and into the modern age. of their 27 proposals, seven have been enacted in some form. that leaves a lot of work to do. indiana is waiting. some of the changes are so obvious that our failure to make them is a daily embarrassment. the conflict of interest when double-dipping government workers simultaneously sit on city or county councils, interrogating their own supervisors and deciding their own salaries,

must end. the same goes for the nepotism that leads to one in four township employees sharing a last name with the politician who hired them. township government, which does not exist in most states, made some sense on the indiana frontier. many township lines were laid out to accommodate the round-trip distance a horse could travel in a day. we've come a little ways since then. today, over four thousand politicians, few of them known to the voters they represent, run over a thousand different township governments. they are sitting on hundreds of millions of dollars in reserves. some have 8 years of spending needs stashed in the bank, yet they keep collecting taxes. some townships are awash in money, while the township next door does not have enough to provide poor relief to its needy citizens. adjacent townships each buy expensive new fire trucks when one would suffice

to cover them both. those serving in township government are good people, and well motivated. we thank them for their service. our problem lies not with those holding all these offices, but with the antique system that keeps them there. i support the clear and simple recommendation of kernan-shepard commission that we remove this venerable but obsolete layer of government, and assign what little remains of its duty to elected city and county officials. likewise our somewhere short of an amen. [laughter] strange arrangement of a three-headed county executive

should change. no business has three ceo's. no football team has three head coaches. no military unit would think of having three coequal commanding offers. we should join the rest of america in moving to a single elected county commissioner, working with a strengthened legislative branch, the county council, to make decision making accountable and implementation swift and efficient. as in the last two sessions, i look forward to constructive cooperation with the assembly in bringing reform about. the only outcome that is unacceptable is no action at all. hoosiers have waited for decades for our government design to catch up to society. let's not keep them waiting any longer. in no realm is our opportunity larger than in the critical task of educating our children. the need for major improvement, and the chance for achieving it, is so enormous tonight that opportunity rises to the level of duty.

advocates of change in education become accustomed to being misrepresented. if you challenge the fact that 42 cents of the education dollar are somehow spent outside the classroom, you must not respect school boards. if you wonder why doubling spending didn't produce any gains in student achievement, you must be criticizing teachers. if your heart breaks at the parade of young lives permanently handicapped by a school experience that leaves them unprepared for the world of work, you must be "anti-public schools." so let's start by affirming once again that our call for major change in our system of education, like that of president obama, his education secretary and so many others, is rooted in a love for our schools, those who run them, and those who teach in them. but it is rooted most deeply in a love for the

children whose very lives and futures depend on the quality of the learning they either do or don't acquire while in our schools. nothing matters more than that. nothing compares to that. some seek change in education on economic grounds, and they are right. to win and hold a family-supporting job, our kids will need to know much more than their parents did. i have seen the future competition every time i go abroad in search of new jobs for our state, in the young people of japan, korea, taiwan, china. let me tell you, those kids are good. they ought to be. they are in school not 180

days a year like here, but 210, 220, 230 days a year. by the end of high school, they have benefited from two or three years more education than hoosier students. along the way, they have taken harder classes. it won't be easy to win jobs away from them. it's not just tomorrow's jobs that are at stake. the quality of indiana education matters right now. when we are courting a new business, right behind taxes, the cost of energy, reasonable regulation, and transportation facilities, comes schools. "what kind of school will my children, and our workers' children attend" is a question we're always asked. sometimes in some places, it costs us jobs today. there is no time to wait. in 1999, indiana passed a law that said schools must either

improve their results or be take over by new management. the little ones who entered first grade then, full of hope and promise, are 18 now. in the worst of our districts, half of them will not be graduating. god bless and keep them, wherever they are and whatever life now holds for them. for those children, we waited too long. and it's not just about the most failing of our schools. the last couple years have seen some encouraging advancements after years of stagnation. but the brute facts persist: only one in three of our children can pass the national math or reading exam. we trail far behind most states and even more foreign countries on measures like excellence in math: at the recent rate of improvement, it would take 21 years for us to catch slovenia, and that's if slovenia stands still. that's too long to

wait. that's too many futures to lose. in every discussion, someone says "this is very complicated." then someone says, "these changes won't be perfect," and then you hear, "the devil is in the details.". all true. but we can no longer let complexity be an excuse for inaction, nor imperfection the enemy of the good. when it comes to our children's future, the real devil is not in the details, he's in the delay, and in 2011 is the year the delay must end. we know what works.

it starts with teacher quality. teacher quality has been found to be 20 times more important than any other factor, including poverty, in determining which kids succeed. class size, by comparison, is virtually meaningless. put a great teacher in front of a large class, and you can expect good results. put a poor teacher in front of a small class, do not expect the kids to learn. in those asian countries i mentioned, classrooms of 35 students are common, and they're beating our socks off. we won't have done our duty here until every single indiana youngster has a good teacher every single year. today, 99 percent of indiana teachers are rated "effective." if that were true, 99 percent -- not one-third -- of our students would be passing those national tests. today's

teachers make more money not because their students learned more but just by living longer and putting another certificate on the wall. their jobs are protected not by any record of great teaching but simply by seniority. we have seen "teachers of the year" laid off, just because they weren't old enough. this must change. we have waited long enough. teachers should have tenure, but they should earn it by proving their ability to help kids learn. our best teachers should be paid more, much more, and ineffective teachers should be helped to improve or asked to move. today, the outstanding teacher, mr. watson, whose kids are pushed and led to do their best, are treated no better than the worst teacher in the school. that is wrong. for the sake of fairness and the sake of our children, it simply has to end. we have waited long enough. we

are beginning to hold our school leaders accountable for the only thing that really matters: did the children grow? did the children learn? starting this year, schools will get their own grades in a form we can all understand: a to f. there will be no more hiding behind jargon and gibberish. but in this new world of accountability, it is only fair to give our school leadership full flexibility to deliver results we now expect. already, i have ordered our board of education to peel away unnecessary requirements that consume time and money without really contributing to learning. we are asking this assembly to repeal other mandates that, whatever their good intentions, ought to be left to local control. i am a supporter of organ donation,

and cancer awareness, and preventing mosquito-borne disease, but if a local superintendent or school board thinks time spent on these mandated courses interferes with the teaching of math, or english, or science, it should be their right to eliminate them from a crowded school day. and while unions and collective bargaining are the right of those teachers who wish to engage in them, they go too far when they dictate the color of the teacher's lounge, who can monitor recess, or on what days the principal is allowed to hold a staff meeting. we must free our school leaders from all the handcuffs that reduce their ability to meet the higher expectations we now have for student achievement. lastly, we must begin to honor the parents of indiana. we

must trust them, and respect them enough, to decide when, where, and how their children can receive the best education, and therefore the best chance in life. visiting with high school seniors, i discovered one new option we should be offering. a significant fraction of our students complete, or could complete, their graduation requirements in well under 12 years. we should say to these diligent young people and their families, if you choose to finish in 11 years instead of 12 we will give you the money we were going to spend while you cruised through 12th grade, as long as you spend that money on some form of further education. in this year's survey of high school students, three out of four said they would like to have that option. let's empower our kids to defray the high cost of education through their own hard work, by entrusting them with this new and innovative choice. another new kind of

choice has come to indiana parents the last couple years, as a byproduct of our property tax reductions. families are now able to choose public schools outside the districts they reside in, tuition-free. schools have begun advertising campaigns, touting their graduation rates and higher test scores. this competition is a highly positive development, as long as it is fair. i ask you to protect our families against any possibility of discrimination by requiring that any school with more applicants than room fill it through a lottery or other blind selection process. indiana has lagged sadly behind other states in providing the option of charter schools. we must have more of them, and they must no longer be unjustly penalized. they should receive

their own funding exactly when other public schools do. if they need space, and the local district owns a vacant building it has no prospect of using, they should turn them over. widening parent's options in these ways will enable the vast majority of children who attend the school of their choice. but one more step is necessary: for families who cannot find the right traditional public school, or the right charter public school for their child, and are not wealthy enough to move near one, justice requires that we help. we should let these families apply dollars that the state spends on their child to the non-government school of their choice. in

that gallery and outside sit the most important guests of the evening. they are children, and parents of children who are waiting for a spot in a charter or private school. they believe their futures will be brighter if they can make that choice. look at those faces. will you be the one to tell the parents "tough luck"? are you prepared to say to them, "we know better than you"? we won't tell you where to buy your groceries or where to get your tires rotated, but we will tell you, no matter what you think, your child will attend that school, and only that school. we have the money to send our children where we think best, but if you don't, well, too bad for you. these children, and their parents, have waited long enough, for a better chance in life. and indiana has waited

long enough for the kind of educational results that a great state must achieve. i have spoken of the economic implications. but at bottom, this is not about material matters. it is about the civil right, the human right, of every indiana family to make decisions for its children. it's about the right of all hoosier children to realize their full potential in life. will you join me in saying, the waiting is over, change has come, and indiana intends to lead it. for us sports fans,

recent times have brought a frustrating string of "almosts". at 60, tom watson almost won the british open. the colts almost won the superbowl. little butler almost won a national basketball championship. besides the disappointment of coming so close, the bad thing about "almosts" is knowing that you may never get that close to victory, and history, again. this cannot be the "almost" general assembly. we are on the 18th hole, in the red zone, on the final possession of a chance for historic greatness. indiana has waited long enough for local government that fits the realities of the 21st century. we have waited long enough for an education system known for excellence in

teaching, and accountable schools that deliver the results our kids deserve. our parents have waited long enough for the freedom to decide which school is best for their children. we cannot "almost" end the waiting. one thing is certain. the rest of the world will not wait on us. other nations, and other states, are forging ahead with the kind of reforms i have proposed here. indiana is now a leader in business climate, fiscal integrity, transportation, property taxes, and so many other respects. now comes the chance to lead in ways that, long-term, may matter more than all of those. wishing won't make it so. waiting won't make it so. but those of you in this assembly have a priceless and unprecedented opportunity

to make it so. it's more than a proposal. it's an assignment. it's more than an opportunity. it's a duty. our children are waiting. our fellow citizens are waiting. history is waiting. it's going to be a session to remember. you're going to do great things. i can't wait. god bless this assembly and this great state. [applause] [applause]

>> : this joint assembly is adjourned. >> : the chair recognizes represent i have tprepl for a motion. is there a second. all of those in favor indicate by aye. we are adjourned.

commerce in washington. [inaudible conversations] >> good morning, everyone. welcome to the u.s. chamber of commerce. by margaret spelling, president of the u.s. forum for policy innovation. thank you for being here this morning. come on and sit down encryptor

coffee. in a few moments, those president ceo, and tom donohue will give his annual state of address. he for he does and the two say a few things about my friend tom donohue. 2010 with a challenging year for this organization, as he contended that the worst economic climate of the great depression, one of the busiest legislative session in recent memory and of course the midterm elections. while our success in such a difficult environment can't he completely attributed to just one person, tom deserves most of the credit for what the chamber was a book to achieve. he provided the leadership and the vision that led to a number of legislative aries, tremendous success in the elections and another strong year of fundraising. what make's time so effective? for starters, the fact that he works harder than people less

than half his age, for one. but it's also his ability to anticipate and take action on the next big thing. tom always has the organization positioned to play an important role in the debates that matter to our members and business. this means that the american business community always has a seat at the table. as we face the challenges and meet new opportunities in the coming year, i'm confident that tom will leave the chamber to even greater success. and i'm really thrilled to be a part of that. here now to share his outlook on the american economy and other policy issues that will impact business is chamber president and ceo, tom donohue. [applause] >> thank you very much,

margaret. that sounded somewhat like an obituary. but i appreciate very much you all being here today. and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. let me thank margaret and the national chamber foundation and office staff who organized this event. and thank you all for coming. at the outset, i'd like to express on behalf of the united state chamber of commerce, our shock and sadness over the tragic shooting in arizona. under any circumstance, the violence, injury and loss of life that occurred are an outrage to all of us. we are especially offended by the fact that this rampage was directed at our democracy so, striking down public servants as well as free citizens who had come to engage in a dialogue and

express their views. we are praying for the full recovery for congressman giffords and others who were injured and our hearts go out to the families of those who lost their lives. while the new year has begun on this site know, i can report that when it comes to the nation's economy, we began 2011 in better shape than we found ourselves last year. at the state of american business is improving. last year we worried about a double to recession. today we are cautiously optimistic that the recovery will continue and pick up steam as the year progresses. the new tax package could give growth and jobs a significant boost. overall, we believe the economy will expand by 3.2% in 2011 and

create 2.4 to 2.6 million new jobs by the end of the year. yet, we still face a number of risks that could send us in the wrong direction and our recovery is fragile and uneven at best. housing and construction are still very weak. a new wave of home foreclosures could drive down home values in both again. oil and gasoline prices are rising rapidly and could reignite inflation. major state are nearly insolvent and will be looking to raise taxes on consumers and businesses. and we faced a long list of known and unknown geopolitical and national security threat that could change our economic

aspects overnight. to be sure, november's election result, the tax package, progress on the korean trade agreement and a new tone coming from the white house have addressed some of the business communities immediate concerns. yet i searched the on companies, lenders and investors still abound. there are many unanswered questions about regulation, taxes and other policies that must be addressed in order to run these aggressive hiring in the air. and ladies and gentlemen, when it comes to jobs, we have a steep hill decline. unemployment has succeeded 9% for 20 consecutive months. that hasn't happened since the 1930s. some 27 million americans are

either unemployed, underemployed or have given up looking for work. let's suppose we do create about 2.5 million new jobs -- net new jobs this year. as welcome as that would be, it would only drive the unemployment rate down by about 1%. in fact, we must create 1.2 million jobs a year, just to absorb the new insurance coming into the workforce. on our current cost, it could take years to get back to where we were before this recession and the financial crisis head. in my book, that's not good enough. therefore in 2011, the chamber's top priority will be to turn an economic recovery into a jobs recovery so that we can put americans back to work.

to succeed, we must work to enact policies that will sustain economic growth or removing regulatory uncertainty and doubling u.s. exports over the next five years. we must make our domestic economy more dead to global investors, to job creators and do startup entrepreneurs pay clearing away the impediments that are causing them to sit on their capital or invest their money outside the united states. and we must do right for future generations by beginning a serious effort to cut runaway spending, reform entitlements and bring government deficit and debt under control. to successfully improve our own economy, we must take into account what other nations are doing to improve their economy.

in many respects, america is not keeping up. too deep in our understanding about our nation's competitive challenges we are doing what any smart coach or political candidate would do before a big game for an important election campaign and that is to learn everything we can no about our opponents strengths, weaknesses and those of ourselves. what about our weaknesses? what about our strength? the chamber is no examining in a factual and object to equate the actions by our government and the actions by the business community that are either moving us forward in a global economy or holding us back. we will then compare it to what our competitors are doing around the world.

these findings, which we planned to release this spring will set the stage for a major project to strengthen americans competitive position in the global economy. at the same time, the chamber will seek to focus our government's attention on a host of immediate priorities and we're prepared to work with anyone in order to make progress on these issues. time doesn't permit me to cover them all, so let me briefly touch on just a few issues, particularly in four areas. regulatory restraint and reform, expanding america's trade, rebuilding the nation's economic foundation, its infrastructure and reducing runaway spending deficits and debt. first, we must rein in excessive regulation and reform the regulatory process. at the federal level alone, regulations already fill 150,000

pages of fine print and it cost to america of $1.7 trillion a year. outlook, many of these regulations are important to the economy and we support them. yet in recent years, we have seen an unprecedented explosion of new regulatory dignity. furthermore, the administration is likely to turn increasingly to the regulatory agencies now that getting legislation under the congress could be more difficult. the result resulting regulatory tsunami poses in our view the single biggest challenge to jobs, our global competitiveness and the future of american enterprise. for example, the new health care law -- think about this a minute, creates 159 new agencies, commissions, panels

and other bodies. it grants extraordinary powers to the department of health and human services to redefine health care as we know it. by mid-december of last year, hhs saturday granted 222 waivers to the law that it just been passed. it would pale in acknowledgment that the war is not totally workable. and with key provisions on the challenge in the courts by states and others, it's time in my opinion to go back to the drawing board. last year, while strongly advocating for health coverage form, the chamber was a leader in the fight against this particular bill and does he support legislation in the house to repeal it. we see the upcoming houseboat, however, as an opportunity for everyone to take a fresh look at health care reform and to

replace unworkable approach is with more efficient and take measures at a lower cost, expand access and improve quality. the regulatory tsunami is also about to wash over our capital markets. the dodd-frank contains the numbers again. they change all the time. 259 mandated rule makings. another 188 suggested rule makings. 63 reports in 59 studies. your grandchildren and my grandchildren will be old and retired before it is all implemented. the chamber's center for capital markets competitiveness is deeply involved in the regulatory rulemaking triggered by this massive law. we are particularly concerned that the new consumer financial protection bureau does not use

its broad authority and ways that will deny credit to small businesses and consumers and the financial products that business needs across the board. we want to make sure that main street and users are still able to use derivatives in an effort to way to manage their legitimate business risk without sidelining billions of dollars in productive capital and costing tens of thousands of job. and although our pending litigation against the sec over its proxy asks us to roll has delayed its implementation. that battle is far from over. we will continue to oppose proposals that would expand the ability of special interest shareholders such as unions to exploit proxy access rules to the detriment of companies, jobs and all of the shareholders.

job creators are also facing unprecedented regulatory activity and case law changes and the department of labor. the national labor relations board and in similar agencies, over 100 such efforts are underway today, covering compensation,otract team, leave, ergonomics, workplace safety, hiring, firing and union organizers. you can only wonder what will be forthcoming. the chamber is going to fight hard throughout the year to challenge policies and rulings that are unfair to employers. but much more than workplace rules are at stake here. some unions, particularly the public employee unions are pushing an extreme agenda that extends well beyond representing their members in the workplace. they have been using their

position as a powerful political force to sabotage the nation's trade agenda, which has damaged our standing around the world. someone to vastly expand the size and force of government, perpetuate the status quo and are feeling public schools and the type of nation's best companies through destructive taxes. the sad irony is that all of the fact deputies undermined the nation's ability to create and keep good paying american jobs. we will also continue our legal and legislative efforts to stop the epa from misapplying environmental law in order to unilaterally regulate greenhouse gas. the chamber will support appropriate bipartisan legislation to delay or stop the epa and return the important

climate change issues to the purview of the congress and the united state. beyond greenhouse gas, epa's regulatory agenda list 342 rule makings in various stages of development and completion. of these, 30 are deemed economically significant, each with a cost to our economy of more than $100 million. how would the chamber challenge this faster rate of regulatory committees across our government? will use a range of tools, depending on the circumstances. get the time has come to also reform this regulatory process it felt, to restore some badly needed balance and accountability for the system. this could be done by giving congress the right to vote up or down on major roles before they take effect and by strengthening

the burden of proof that all the regulatory agencies would have to demonstrate when they are imposing major roles on the business community and other elements of society. finally, the chamber will soon stand up a new group that will engage one or more of the most respected advocates of stature and experience in the regulatory arena. this group will continually told the story to the american people, to policymakers and the media about the massive cost of excessive regulation on jobs and found our personal and economic freedom. we cannot allow this nation to move from a government of the people to the government of the regulators. that's where it has been added under the republican party and democratic party a lake.

we're going to be engaged in this fight for years to come and turn this curve any more acceptable direction. another key priority for the chamber is to create jobs by advancing a pro-american trade agenda that they'll both exports and five years and then doubles them again in the next five years. last year, we heard a lot of talk about expanding trade, but we didn't see very much action anywhere in our government. we have a good bipartisan opportunity to change that in 2011. a year ago the chamber released a study, which warned that the united states will lose more than 380,000 existing jobs and 40 billion export sales if we fail to implement our free trade agreements with -- that are all standing, ready to be

implemented. and if we don't do it, what is going to happen, both the e.u., canada and other nations are putting their free-trade agreements in and they'll take the business would like to have. the administration must work urgently with the new congress to approve south korean in colombia and panama agreements. we will pull out all the steps we can to help the administration get the vote to pass these bills. we also strongly support the transpacific partnership negotiations to open market and expand trade with some of the fastest-growing asian countries. that's where our opportunities are. and let's not overlook america's largest commercial partner, the e.u. this month i'll be traveling to dublin, brussels on the world economic forum in dumbo switzerland. at one key object of my trip is to advance the idea of simply

eliminating all tariffs on goods and the 600 lan dollars transatlantic trading relationship. an independent study commissioned by the chamber, but done in europe found that doing this would increase transatlantic trade for more than $100 billion in the next few years. we think it could also jumpstart global trade negotiations and set the stage for similar agreements with other parties. we also need stronger global rules as well as more effect of enforcement to address the rampant success of intellectual property in both the digital and physical worlds. this is an issue that unites business and labor. republicans and democrats. no one wants our intellectual property stolen. consumers should not be

threatened by unsafe and counterfeit products and we cannot stand by as 19 million jobs and our most innovative and creative industries are threatened. in addition, we need to reform export control rules, which are designed and were designed during the war and cost us billions and billions of dollars in lost export sales. the administration deserves serious credit for the progress it has made in creating a single export control list that distinguishes between the crown jewels of american tech allergies and those widely available anywhere in the world. we urge officials to move quickly to move these adjustments. we also continue to press our major trading partners to open their markets and create level playing fields for american

goods and services. china is a vital market for the united states. our exports for that country are growing faster than i must anywhere else in the world. but we are also concerned about a host of chinese policies permit expert to promote indigenous innovation to the favoritism that shows two domestic industries to its lax ip protections, to its undervalued current v. some progress has been made on these and other issues. more progress is needed and soon. but starting a trade lie with one of the fastest current export markets in the world is not the answer. as we work to persuade china and others to adhere to the principles of free and fair trade, we must also live up to those print, we must also live up to those print, we must also live up to those print. that's why we welcome last

week's news that the administration is taking the first serious step towards resolving the longest-running u.s. trucking dispute. it's been 15 years since the united states promised carefully inspect the trucks to move back and forth between our countries. the resulting tariffs imposed against us and authorized under nafta has cost us 25,000 american jobs in recent time. it's time to keep our word and get the trucks moving. we also need to make the united states more track is to global investors. to global talent into tourists. the chamber will work to reform our tax code, lower the corporate tax rate, which is the second-highest in the developing world. almost all of us, our sons and

daughters are descendents of immigrants. the chamber will continue to pursue with others a comprehensive immigration reform program. we also urgently need to improve visa processing, oppose attempts to get temporary worker programs and increase the number of worker visas. regrettably, many americans think that trade agreements cause jobs to foreign integration and our national sovereignty and the u.s. investments abroad take the domestic jobs away. to change these misconceptions, and they are misconceptions, will launch a major initiative to educate citizens and policy makers on trade that will clearly link global engagement to american jobs. 95% of the people that we want to sell some into live overseas,

outsider country. there are 283 free trade agreement in force around the globe today. the united states has just 11 free trade agreements covering 17 countries. it's time to get our country back in the trading game across the globe. another priority that we're putting front and center this year is the need to rebuild america's economic foundation. the platform of the infrastructure on which our society runs. as we fail to act on gross returns will soon run out of capacity. our economy will hit a wall and we will be physically unable to grow. we will lose jobs and even lives

as a result. of course service transportation, aviation and water resources programs are all operating under a series of short-term funding arrangements. makes it impossible for states and the federal government to work together, to fix these problems and to create jobs. but the chamber will lead the fight to remove the lakeview tory vico at barriers that have locked away federal money, but hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars of private infrastructure spending. but we must also have a strong, consistent and reliable commitment to infrastructure or these private dollars will go somewhere else. now with crude oil prices on the rise again, i'm sure we all noticed with gasoline costs, we are all reminded of the compelling need to develop more

of our own fast energy and other natural resources. according to one study, increasing access to american domestic oil and gas resources, could in the next 10 or 15 years create a minimum of 500 dirty thousand jobs and give us about $150 billion in government revenue or the equivalent of 4 million barrels of oil today. we use about 20 million barrels of oil a day in this country. there is no good and valid reason to send her money to other countries, to pay something we have an adequate supply of right here at home. we can create jobs, reduce our trade and budget deficits and increase their security by prudently and environmentally soundly developing all forms of alternative renewable in traditional energy.

in order to expand trade and move people, goods and information and money throughout the world, we have got to focus our attention to this country on america's global supply chain. now it operates on our infrastructure, but it is a supply chain that moves everything that i just mentioned. and so, we have done something i think will help us and we'll all benefit from. we think it shut potter, the former postmaster of the united case, the longest-serving postmaster general said the 1800. we pass them to the base. portend projects for us. he will consult with the leading supply chain firms and experts across the country and the world and help us validate the business community around a plan to improve, maintain, secure and advocate for a 21st century global supply chain imagistic

systems. that rebuilding america's economic foundation is about more than physical infrastructure. it is fundamentally about we the people. in 2011, the chamber will continue to mobilize our grassroots federation to the cause of improving education and training opportunities for all americans. this is more than an economic issue. how can any of us that still when millions of americans children are track and ailing schools and a third don't even get a high school diploma. this is a moral outrage and a taking social timebomb in this country. business, like all americans, must also do its part to help address another defining challenge of our time. the growth of government spending and entitlement and

with it, the explosion of government debt on a federal and basis. the national debt are dx reads $14 trillion is on track to nearly double over the next 10 years. our current fiscal path leads only to one destination, insolvency. to control deficits, we must first put unemployed americans back to work so they can be paying taxes instead of collecting benefits. the congress and the administration must also move swiftly to reduce spending. now this next sentence i am going to say i'm not sure on the numbers are going to love it, but the chamber will support strong proposals, even if we don't like all the details. we also make the case -- will make the case for entitlement

reform because any plan that fails to tackle these runaway programs is doomed to fail. great preponderance of our expenditure on entitlements. now ladies and gentlemen, let me end where i began. i note of optimism about our economy and our country. our economy is picking up steam and will see stronger job creation ahead. and while the philosophical gap on some issues will be too wide for us to bridge, i believe that our elected officials can find enough common ground or at least some shred of the blatant self-interest to make progress on the priorities that i've outlined today. to help her save them from the chamber will keep our grassroots system, including our voter education and issues advocacy programs fully mobilized, funded

and fired it through this year. we'll continue to expand our free enterprise programs and all of the committees were conducting around the country. we will also significantly expand our efforts to support small businesses and do everything we can to assure their success. but at the same time, we look at small businesses more actively engaged in the chambers political, legislative advocacy veterans. and we will spare no effort to vigorously defend the rights of companies and associations to lobby, to petition the government and to fully participate in the political and policy debate that will shape the future of this country. we will not allow to be intimidated and we will use

every tool at our disposal to challenge those who try to silence our voice. our approach in washington will be to call them as we see them. we'll continue to have our differences from time to time, but a white house on some issues, but on many of them will work vigorously together. will support the new house leadership on many occasions and will work with democratic legislatures as well. but no one should expect the chamber to march in lockstep with anyone. we have a clear mission and an agenda of around to continue to win important policy victories for our members, the american business community. it is to support, protect and advance the free enterprise system that made this country great. and it is to help create good jobs and promising opportunities for the people of our country so that they can achieve the

american dream. i want to thank you again for coming. we look forward to working with all of you to vigorously on proudly represent the one institution in our nation that really works one institution that can put our nation back to, executive vice president of the chber of the united states, in charge of all activities in dealing with the congress and the government. and i would like to ask that

when you ask your question, if you would please identify your self and your organization because they're a lot of other people here that would like to have that information as well as we would, too. so who has the first question? yes, ma'am. >> i'm penny starr with the cms news. you said you were in favor of comprehensive immigration reform. could you explain what that means to you and does it include a pathway to citizenship? >> we think the most important parts of a comprehensive immigration reform would be first of all away for a show with 12 minute people to adhere to legitimacy so they can easily participate in the society, pay their taxes and drive cars, do that sort of thing. second, we need a guestworker program that people can easily come back and forth for work.

and some of that would be probably seasonally for crops and for recreation, organizations and that one. third, we definitely need a way to deal with high-end talented folks that are needed in this economy. it's amazing that we take 12 years to train chemical/phd in chemical engineering and then we used to always keep them. and now it's hard for them to stay. they are were a lot of issues of that type. and we could go on and on with other parties. to answer your specific question, i don't think the citizenship thing is necessary right now. i think we have to pick four or five things everybody needs and let's get it done. of course to make it work we have to protect our border. yes, ma'am.

>> hi, kim dixon, reuters. on the deficit issue, can you be more specific about which parts of the deficit panels recommendations the chamber wod like to see legislation at may be worked upon the? >> well, you made it a more difficult question when you added it this year. we absolutely believe we ought to begin a to find ways to reduce spending in every way possible, while recognizing you're not going to get in the short run and lot of deficit reduction until we get all these pele back to work. but does burrs continually points out, that when we get to the issues of the recommendations of the different groups that have been studying our challenges, we're not going to get anything very serious

dive into which we do with fundamental issues of entitlements. i guess when you put -- bruce, wh you put together the entitlement issues as well as the interest on the debt, which is mandated and which could easily go up as interest rates go u you've got -- you've got more than 60% of our total government expenditures. [inaudible] >> well, they call for restructured entitlements and budget process reform. we would agree at that level, the 30,000-foot level with all three of those principles. >> yes commissary. [inaudible] >> -- how would you categorize your relationship with the white house after the end of the year? >> well, you know, it's really interesting to look at the two-year relationship at the white hoe.

we have supported them an extraordinary number of issues, including by the way the stimulus question, which a lot of our members to think was important, but we really did. and weontinue to work with the people all throughout the white house. and so, it's never been personal with us. it's also been arguments about with about a bailout, environmental law, health care law, but been personal. many of its people over the that that sort of excited and energetic about representing their interests. i do think that the new people will be helpful. bill daley is a real pro and we worked with him for many years and sperling has done this before and knows the people. but it's very important to focus on the issue. the only real serious exchange and back-and-forth haseen on

the question of a particular issue under discussion. we have our respect for people to serve in the government. we have a great respect for the president. by the way, we never participate in presidential politics, never. of course, we do in the senate and house politics. yeah? good move. [inaudible] >> -- in mexico. and on the other hand, i would like to asyou, how do you think the new house is going to accept the new program of the mexican drugs? >> well, we have a relationship with mexico that it is fundamental and absolutely essential to our long-term economic well-being and to our

long-term national security. we wary and work hard on the challenges that mexco has in dealing with the drug gangs. we have a vigorous trade program with mexico and one that facilitated. we are very pleased to see the expansion moving forward on trying to get the tracking issue resolved. but thisis an issue that commands the attention of everyone in government and the business community. and we're going to work to make sure that it gets better irregular basis. [inaudible] >> -- approve this program. [inaudible] >> i think that we're going to have some chasteen about on issues of immigration and

questions of that type. but i think that the house will act in a very responsible way on matters of our national security and our national well-being as it deals wh mexico. right here. >> i'm with "politico." mr. donahue, there's been a lot of discussion with the business community that the white house pays lip service to business concerns, but doesn't quite get it on the policy level. what three things could the white house to policy wise that they could implement, that would show to the chamber at the white house gets it and may not just paying lipservice anymore? >> do you want to do this first? >> well, number one, as tom articulated i thought this morning, were drowning in a regulatory overload mode. it doesn't seem to regulatory agencies can even handle the

workload you've seen in terms of 200 some waivers on the welfare space. predictions for the financial area are a decade or longer to figure out a way to dal with nearly 450 while making going on comparing to what is actually talking about trade. we've had good pep talks were cheers. as thomas mentioned, it's time to get off the sidelines and get in the game. he went through the numbers. i won't repeat them about we've been out of the game which means removing backwards. white house has talked about fundamental tax reform. the business at large has embraced that discussion. but again, what is going on around us that the rest of the world has been engaged in tax the competition for decades. oecd has dramatically boost the rate from 23 to have to 26. were at 35. japan is ahead of us. they announced two weeks ago their candidates are almost cutting theirs in half.

i mean, if we continue to sit and do nothing and furthermore fail to develop our ample natural resources in oil and coal and nuclear and on and on and on, not just solar and wind in renewables and alternatives, we're going to fall backwards. it's pretty simple. [inaudible] >> they're not going to suspend it. but the art spending and health care, by giving those waivers. they are going to be more. i think they need to get it right. our concern is get it right. ght now, the agencies themselves are under stress and can't even handle that type of workload. we've got to move beyond talk. you get threal action of policies here and proposals. >> just one point. i think the issue here that this white house is beginning to understand, as we are together, that even though the economy is

percolating that were going to get a 3.5% economic growth this year, were still going to end up with 8.5% or 9% unemployment. we had to figure out what we do to take away in take away uncertainties causing companies to sit on their cash, causing companies to forestall the decisions until they figure out what's going to happen in capital markets and health care and environment. and i think the white house has to pick and choose. and by the way, we won't agree in all of this, but i'm absolutely convinced that they are ready to move on trade and regulatory issues to do what it going to take to get people back to work. and we'll go right here now. >> miller segura from voice of america. the u.s. chamber was harshly criticized last yar perhaps unfairly so on the issue of campaign contributions.

is there any thought by the chamber to provide perhaps a little bit more transparency in the future in terms of campaign closures? >> no, not at all. >> here is the basic issue. the law allows us to behave the way we do because we're in the voter education business. we are doing this in a way that lows us to bring together independent expenditure money and enter the elections withou any international money, by the way. and the reason that it's important to us not to changes because when it is known who made the contribution, then it gives others an opportunity to demagogue than our attack them or encourage them not to do i so i don't think you'll see a lot change right now. right over there. the guy with the mic. >> jam coda with "the associated

press." he spoke about commitments to infrastructure and i'm wondering if you have a dollar figure you think would be necessary in order to accomplish what you think is needed. and how does that sqre with your call for deficit reduction, given that's likely to come to a buzz saw with the house republicans? >> well, i think you're exactly right at the end of your question that there is hesitancy to move on the infrastructure question. but we all know if we don't do it the infrastructure, or going to have a significant reduction in national productivity. so we have to deal with the highway bill and the aviation bill and the water pills that are all in suspended animation and keep getting pushed forward on three-month extensions. and therefore those situations, the state and federal governments, who jointly do this are not able to make a pl and are not going to make the kinds of investments we need and i think it's going to have a gative effect on our economy. we can then talk about how this is paid for.

traditionally now, both the aviation trust fund in the highway trust fund -- some people call them taxes, but the are user fees. if we don't dislike or drive on the road come yodon't have to pay anything. and so, for the most part. so for us to say, if people want to use these resources that we have to find a way to pay for them. and i would say the really exciting thing is if we could get that werd al, i think we could spring up $200 billion worth of private investment that could go into the nations infrastructure in a big hurry. you know, it's very simple to sit and say well, if you want to reduce spending, how could you ever do this? well, you can apply that to a lot of things. it's still think we want to take care of people's health needs. i still think we want to take care of the fundamental issues of our society, their safety.

but we can still look for the expenditures that are really crippling us. and it doesn't have to be infrastructure. [inaudible] >> i think you'd have to figure out having a long-term plan for all three of those trust funds. >> no. well, you'd have to put a little more money and it from the users, the research may get your return. jp, who do we have over there? >> neyland ux or national public radio. on deficits come use of the chamber would support strong proposals, even if we don't like all the details. with those details -- could they include higher taxes quite >> well, you know, bruce just gave you a very clear statement about what is happening to the

american business community on a globally competitive basis. second, a nike to think about the fact that every state that is in financial difficulty -- i hear them talking about increasing taxes on business. what we would look at is a fundamental serious adjustment in how our taxes are good. and we will be there because we as citizens and we have a business community have to be a part of that solution. but i'm not going to negotiate with myself right here by picking one or another issues. we're not going to win it all and we've t to be a part of the solution. we're not going to be a part of the problem. yes. >> eric coolidge, american shipper magazine. just one follow-up than a question. regarding the infrastructure, what's your opinion about the house was open the door to the highway trust fund potentially to be used for other uses and

not to be sacrosanct. and then, ould youexplain more about what you're intending to get out of the supply chain project you're working on and why mr. potter is the rig person for that, given that the post op does not function in this kind of and rooted in the 20th century. >> i hope he is here to hear you. listen, first of all, to the whole question of the issue of why we want to do the supply chain deal, the single perhaps all-encompassing opportunity for us to drive national product to the is to significantly improve our global supply chain. you know, it wasn't very long ago the supply chain was around the country and from year to europe or here to the americas.

supply chain now which moves goods, people and money and information on a global basis, with half of the economy being in asia is something that we really need to continue to refine and iprove. and by the way, as you look at itgets more complicated because when you think you got it, technology changes and the trading partners change and the means of transportation's change. we want jack to go around and talk to these people and figure out how one of public policy basis that this institution, which represent the broadest scope of american business, large and small, from every walk of life can lead the way in that hearing. now, contrary to your suggestion , what has happened at the postal service. two interesting things happened. first of all -- first come of it

is out downturn. and that affects business. second, they been affected by all of te other mailing systems both solid technology stuff. and potter come you probably don't know it, but it's taken 200,000 workers -- unionized workers i might stay out of the postal service and is regarded by people that know a lot about this is one of the best people in the supply cin logistics and transportation business and we are honored and pleased to have him. how come you were the first part of the program -- of the question. [inaudible] >> yeah, my bottom line is to break the highway trust fund -- is to take something that fundamentally works. we have some other trust funds you could do the same thing. and i don't think it's a very good idea and i'm not sure that some of the leaders the congress tonight you're going to be in concert on what they'd like to do. i'll come back there.

>> trimark shaft or an investment news. i have a question about dodd-frank. even among house republicans, there's not nearly the passion for repealing what you have for health care reform. as a practical matter, what can you do about dodd-frank? and secondly, to sec reports are due within the next week. and i'm wondering ithe chamber has a position on a universal fiduciary duty for reinvestment advice in the establishment of a self-regulatory organization for investment advisers. >> first of all, i don't think anybody top about getting rid of dodd-frank. there are about four or five or six things that need to be paid attention to. the parties sued the sec on the proxy access to, which is nothing more than an absurd to help unions and some broke hedge funds put leverage on corporate

boards that are in no value at all to anybody but those two groups and would be of high value -- would be hurtful to the overall shareholders of the corporation. so that's one place. if we can get rid of that, will be better off. i think we're very concerned about the consumer protection group and how it's organized and what its approach is going to be and how they try and use the authority that they're going to have. and that will be an interesting debate. i think the issue of how we're going to do with the customized derivatives, as i mentioned in my talk, we don't want to put l that cash on the sideline. we want to keep it working when it is not needed to be tied up. and i think will be able to resolve that. and so, we could go through four or five or six things and say

that if the congress or the courts or the administration or the regulation agencies themselves ought to address these anymore up the way, that we could get -- we could get to a much better situation in a hurry and it is my view we will make progress on not in one of those venues. and as far as the secwhat they're going to say, we think that both of those are moving in the right direction. if their findings are helpful, and they probably will be in those areas, thatwill be fine. if they're not, will challenge them. yes, ma'am. [inaudible] >> -- the affordable care it provides an opportunity to provide workable measures with those that are fact give to

command access, lower cost and quality. could you cite one or two such measures the chamber with the poor? >> sure, but let me put this in context. i believe that the congress of the united states will probably succd in not vote. but if you look when you see our press release on not and when you look at what i said in my comments is that will move us immediately to look at these issues of high significance. and i believe that the senate, following the house and the president of the value in making the constructive changes that are needed in the bill so that there is not -- the president is not put in a position and the senate is not put in a position where failure to address is four or five issues, which bruce explained to you in a minute,

will be too i think a much more difficult vote for the proponents of this health care, which by the way, we are one of them. then it would be -- that we learn somethingfrom the house vote and then go ahead and work on these issues. and bruce just hit the five issues. >> tonight on mandate reporting has bipartisan support and we expect we'll see that repeal at gunpoint. we have huge concerns about the employer mandate. .. plans we have serious concerns. by the way, with the medical loss ratio issue, particularly the the individual markets, small group markets, which affects our small business

members because it is doubtful it is a state of maine and others have pointed out that their policies by virtue of how the makeup of the health care marketplace is in some states that they could ever achieve those. the ininsurers handle insurance abroad cannot come even close 10% to 15% because over the way they have to operate audiotape 24/7 basis. air cuts if you will in this bill like health savings accounts, l ike flexible spending accounts which are consumer scharfen which has enabled some companies including a large companies such as safeway and the cost curve down for five years went in the wrong direction, just to go up a handful. so our issue here is as tom points out the size of the majority will clearly go through clearly with democratic support in the house i would imagine. i don't feel that it's going to,

you know, make it in and out of the senate floor nor would i expect president obama who signed and enacted into law to sign it if it ever got to his desk. so to us this is a tandem deal between h.r. two and h.r. nine to begin the process to make some changes and corrections so that this is more workable and affordable. i would agree with cbo and cms; this is not brand and the cost curve. cbo had dhaka and caveat warnings -- don't forget future congress are going to have to implement these tax increases and a lot of the rest of this. i have my doubts that we will see half a trillion dollar cut in medicaid for the sample with 77 million of my generation joining a club 44 milli under the cms scenario the willdrive 20% of hospitals and doctors out of practice and so those aren't winning strategies for anybody that needs health care in the

united states. >> matej zenas batres. a question for each of you. on the tax question, corporate tax rate the at ministry is floating around ideas region of the business community which are you recommending in terms of the offsets trying to do this in a revenue neutral way, can be done it? what do you think wille off the budget that you would support? tom on china whose visit next week the currency always gets the issue but there is a lot of underbrush. what kind of things are you trying to put away for the chinese and export controls were pushing the chinese to open certain areas? >> first i would say thank you for asking me the china question and him the tax question. the china issue now currency is important and the beginning of there's going to be a further reduction in the currency but the real issue ere is to

continue the massive expansion in the exports while at the same time challenging the indigenous innovation rules the set of our intellectual property, both of thtechnical and real terms, and the questions that are being put in place that make it more difficult to move our goods in and out of china. the whole issue on the supply chain. we areoing to work all of those things in a positive way. we are going to press to make sure we have a fair opportunity for american exports to create jobs. i've been very engaged in this. i'm looking for which a very positive visit by president hu. >> i'm not going to sit here and talk about what we will offer after converse but i would suggest in the tax base you have

to look at this very carefully. for example, whenever we have reduced dividend in fact we have produced more revenue for treasury, not less we have got about i'm guessing close to if not a trillion dollars abroad since we're the industrialized country left in the world the tax worldwide income that seems to be pretty stupid based upon what everybody else has done and is doing. getting that money back here sooner to help out with a cyclical and help the economy through repatriation would be a smart idea that if in fact we got our tax rates low where we were globally competitive which today we are not, then you're not going to see the level of income like that abroad you're going to see that money be moved and reinvested here in the united states. so we've got to get this thing in a way that induces economic growth and induces investment

and investing in plants, equipment and people to read the ghanem is to look at the total package. there isn't one yet. there's a lot of talk. we will work with them and aggregate obviously for where we sit and represent our members' interest in that process but the reality is we are being knocked out of the game. >> i've t a microphone. to victoria -- >> [inaudible] >> when you are in the back speak up. >> i will. satori with the "wall street journal." two related questions on dodd-frank. one, the ctc and the cftc were both scheduled to get budget increases have as part of the dodd-frank law and those, to date, have ot happened. does the chamber have a position on whether those funding increases should have been? and then also really did come there has been some talk about among house republicans especially as the need to slow down the rule wrting process and may be kind of move those

deadlines back. where does the chamber -- do you support that? >> well i think some of the issues that we ce in dodd-frank, flexible the consumer protection -- i would like to have that slowed down so but we can really think about what we are doing, and what are we doing to limit the availability of credit for small and large companies and what's going to happen to the consumer economy if we do that. so i think that would be fine if it slows down. do i think that actually reducing the management budgets for the fcc is something we would do? we would rather have the fcc the smartest most capable people we have so we can deal with these issues, where we would be where we would be in working hard on the financial side is the money

to implement parts o the rule either there or on health care or on other energy or other issues that we think are going to do nothing but cost this economy jobs and make it difficult circumstances for the american business community. >> mark from bloomberg news. door forecast for growth of this year is higher than the kind of average per analyst. number one, what makes you more bullish than the average wall street analyst and second, to date corporations have been making record profits this cosa that hasn't translated into jobs in the u.s. to beat you mentioned uncertainty that is their something you should be asking members to do to create jobs in the u.s.? >> well, first of all why our numbers are a fraction or two above the others, i think we have a pretty good sense of

what's going n in the economy and on the trade side and, you know, in the domestic consumer economy. but you will give me the benefit that when i made my comments after i made this prediction i gaveou the four or five things that could change that. for example, oil prices. when we take that number, the price of gasoline is probably half a dollar lower than it is right now. we've got the small oil pipeline problem in alaska but i think the will be fixed this week. we are stopping -- we've made it almost impossible to start new drilling in the gulf. those things become more difficult than the price of fuel goes up and then, you know, we are going to have inflation, more inflation, and then we are going to have reduction and

consumption or travel or whatever it happens to be, so i think our number is based on logical conclusions, but i am not too sure the we are going to get there. i think i said that it's a very fragile kind of economic growth and by not sure we are going to get their depending on what happens in the interim. now to the question of when you raise that the end, it got to think about this f a minute. i think the most important thing to tell a company is to return a reasonable return to their investors. the ceo of a corporation, the board of the corporation, their primary responsibility, law, the activities the sec and the

congress and the treasury, the law is to maximize the value in an honorable way to their shareholders. now one of the things you want to start writing the story that is very, very interesting -- this unemployment pergola time, this problem has been going on what, 20 months? guess what, if i am running a company and i have laid off let's say 800 people in a big company, i figured out how by now to be a without them. i used technology, have done -- gotten other people to do the work and by usig some part time, using some over time coming and why did i do that? i am doing that because that is what i have to do to keep the door open and the people that are working employed and return a reasonable share to my sheholders, and particurly worried about that. the second thing is now that they have sitting on a lot of

cash and there will be some acquisitions. you can see them going on right now because people see the economy of scale. the place that bruce would probably talk to you and the health care -- if we can't change some of those requirements, i mean, there is no way for them to succeed without consultation. and you know what happens when you consolidate to companies. you're not going to add more employees, usually some go, but i think the issue s companies use of ford motor yesterday said they are going to add 7,000 jobs. when companies see consumer spending up and when companies get rid of some of the uncertainty of the cost for example with health care, and when companies can see a way on the environmental side, they are going to be much more robust in spending that we that creates jobs. >> i would add i think you have toear in mind that we have

gone through a very, very rough patch the past 20 months. at the end of the day it is a fundamentally a supply-demand issue and you are running the 70 or 80% it's not the kind of economy the companies are motivated to invest. second, you have had a massive leveraging of debt both at the business and at the personal level. we have actually seen consumers go from the net - savings to the positive savings and just 20 months. and we saw a slowdown of retail. we haven't yet i think gotten back to the pri's mine 11 members of the tourists coming in from abroad so there's a lot of things that have been going on here and as we saw the uptick in consumer spending and as the automobile industry which don't forget salles 43 plus% decline year over year of the top of the sales at the top of the recession and while the numbers are encoaging we are far an

away from 16, 17 million units that they were regularly usedto produce things we have a wayto go. it's a supply and demand equation and when the demand picks up and whisper to see some big and encouraging signs to that than companies are going to be forced to invest. >> what bruce said is interested. i love tourism. degette good time and leave a lot of money and they go home. when tourism picks up the recreational sites and hotels and restaurants are going to do better and that's when to cause hiring. they're going to go back here -- [inaudible] >> just don't play with it. >> on the greenhouse gas emissions iue i wanted to ask you you said that you are opposed to the epa regulating that and you are poised to legally battle that both on the hill and in the courts but at

the same time certainty is a mantra in this discussion if there are some elements of the counity that want congresto act on this are you willing -- are you going to work with people like senator gramm and others to bridge the divide in the republicans and democrats on this issue in the next two years despite the conventional wisdom which is that nothing will get done the next two years on this particular issue? >> one of the great thinkers of our modern society who ran the hudson institute propose great books used to say the prevailing thought and conventional wisdom is almost always wrong. we have had extensive discussions with gramm and carry and the lieberman and others and that any time those discussions were to begin again as a substitute for what's being done

by the epar with the epa is trying to do we would be honored and pleased to participate. bruce may want to say a word or two about why we are pushing so hard on what the epa is doing be on the fact we don't think they have the authority to do it. >> we don't believthe clean air act is designed to regulate the greenhouse gas emissions. we don't think this is compatible. second, to correct the record you should know since the bush administration the u.s. chamber has called for coprehensive climate change legislation from congress rather than the unilateral rulemaking by the epa. we think the rule making is different than what other agencies need and have to go through. we think it's necessary that we tackle this and think the's going to be movement. i would agree we are not going to see a massive comprehensive climate change bill.

we are going to see pieces of legislation however that help get you to ords a reduction in eenhouse gases. bingaman has a bill on the renewable portfolio side of the ledger in our world that should include nuclear to be part of it and if it does it will some the cut in july republican support. don't forget efficiency reductions and process of manufacturing is a single biggest gain he can make in reductions and as a nation we have already done that for the tune of about 40% reduction in units of energy use per unit of output in our in manufacturing sector. companies are highly motivated particularly with increasing fuel costs to take every appropriate step they can. this i another legacy of not being opposed to something. it's bei opposed to something that if you look at waxman markey creating some 1400 mandates, 400 new agencies, all

kind of taxes in our view and i think and many others i can't think of a single business organization in town that, quote, indoor stick which is simply not workable. so, we've reached out gramm caribbean the liberman. it covers our initiative. we met with them repeatedly and helped organize a coalition of energy producers and heavy industrial energy users and that was then literally for months providing input in terms of how and what would be necessary to turn the corner to get to a good bill and get into the floor of the senate and off the floor of the senate. we will continue to work with people when it is in everybody's interest to do it read >> thank you. right here. >> i am pleased u.s. chamber is falling. in your speech today [inaudible]

and what is making more to china. i visited india and schmidt indigent ministers and they are all eager. how do you view the world that indians are invested and more in america and the india exchange is not back for money it's the pure prepared billions of dollars and also we can export our [inaudible] >> well, i was in india last year and spent a lot of time with the leadership and the heads of the major companies. we have here the chamber a major

organization the u.s. and indian business council we brought a lot of american investors to india and hosting a lot of indian investors to believe the relationship is very positive. i believe that many of the company's particularly on the technology side and the business side spokesman and telecommunications and others there's a lot of things going on. i think he will see a big uptick in exports investment and business with india and the united states in the next year or two. we will do that when you have right there. >> jeneane gold from kaiser health news. what is your game plan for fighting the new health all? how much do you expect to spend and how will you approach some of the provisions the seem to benefit the business community including the small business tax

credit which many small businesses appear to be taking advantage of. >> we will the way we can. first if we have filed a comment after comment after comment for the rulemaking we have seen some constructive positive changes as a result of that. there will be more of that. we will continue in that process. we do expect as i mentioned earlier that there will be some kind of a targeted rifle shot legislati approaches like th 1099 mandate and some of the other things i mentioned. weill work through them when we feel the regulatory process was not fair and we've seen some of that by the way into the we haveseen ten or 12 interim final rules that have a long history in this town of becoming final rules and in that process by the way some of them have become interim final ruls beforeven having had a final rule for comment so those are some of the challenges with

respect to the small business credit bigot yes some small businesses are taking advantage of it. i think a vast majority in our membership and other business groups that have a high number and high density of small businesses view that as not a particularly workable issue. but the bigger issue of subsidies i don't want to lose sight of. the ball disappear. so you get everybody in the game and then in 2014 they are gone. so you have a group of people that for well more than a decade or small business members called for a mentally for the small market reforms of the can get in the game and at affordable way. kiwi tease them into it with a very complicated subsidy mechanism that then disappears once the car in to it. >> s emma with insight u.s. trade. i have a question about the free trade agrement. there seems to be an indication in the house some might withhold support for korea as a way to

ensure that coloia and panama were in the at and attrition to reduce the power that administration strategy and can you say more about the agreement? is the chamber on the proposal or are there other oanizations reporting that etc? >> well, thank you. first of all, the trade agreement this first upright nellis korea. we need to move on the very quickly and with dispatch because there are so many jobs at stake and right now we are losing jobs, and if the e.u. and canada and others get their -- when i left korea som months ago theaustralians were arriving to talk about peace and all sorts of things, so it's important to get this done, there are jobs online. at the same time, it is our view that the panel ma agrement should be done because the two

problems that were in the way panel took care of, and my own personal and i think chbers view on columbia is a moral imperative. with that country has done for us and for themselves and how we have continually call on them for their spport, for us to walk away from that or even slow it down is unconscionable seóul we are going to leave it up to the congress to cue it up, but a situation that would be well we are going to do one and not together or we are going to do to and not get one you are looking for a fight you don't want to have said is on that issue in case you are interested the question of the project we have under way the question of the project we have under way talking about king away all of the tariffs

on poducts exchanged and ld and bought between the united states and the e.u., i talked to a lot of companies, i talked to a lot of representatives and business groups throughout europe and i've had some very serious conversations with leaders of european countries. i've talked to a few people on the hill. i think this would be a great deal. would be a big stimulus toboth economies. but i think that if we get it going and talking about it there will be about stepping heads around the world and people say we met, what are they doing? how do i get in on that, and we believe this would be a great stimulus to get people back in talking about a global trade agreement. i am going at the end of the month to further discuss this

thing with a lot of people come and mycolleagues are beginning to discuss it here in the united states, so i suspect you will he for and against about that coming from a lot of places and hope you will follow it and cover it. we've got a few more. why don't we go right there. we will go with you right here. on the issue of global competitiveness in the united states, president obama often mentions three areas he could help global competitiveness, education, r&d, infrastructure, and it seems republicanand democrats could come together on those three issues. where do you think they might be able to do that and find common ground on those issues? >> ihink that we are already together on r&d. i think the education issue we

are all together on the identification of the crisis. it used to be that a good number of people didn't get a college degree city could go work in a steel mill and you can't do that anymore. you can work in a steel mill but you hae to be about to run a computer and do algebra and be able to read effectively etc., etc.. so what we need to do is continue to work with arne duncan from the education secretary and others to really push his effort and challenged those people that want to live with a status quo, and i think the we will find a lot of common ground on that. on the infrastructure thing, i think that we are all saying the right thing we are just not getting there and a free that he wants it but nobody wants to pay for it and we are going to have to figure out a way to get there, but it is something when you think about it you not only get a long-term benefit, but you

get the short term and the long term benefit of creating a lot of jobs. and i thin as eople look at a recovery that is not going to drive down on employment at the speed they would like to, if you might see more tension in the infrastructure boost. >> i would make a couple quick comments. first of education and the it's important to remember the new speaker of the house was a lead negotiator for the child left behind with george miller and thclinton administration. that isn't a bad start. on the r&d, let's not confuse two things. one, we have had an r&d tax credit since i think 81 and it's never been paid for, treasury never expected it to be paid for. our view 30 some years later is kind of a not debate that it had to be paid for last fall and it ended up not being. the real issue is the federal government has been cutting back

its long-term r&d investments which are needed to leverage the business community university money for these long-term issues that our commercial enterprise just simply can't undertake and the government needs to get back in that game and on infrastructure to tom's point, everybody is saying the right thing. nobody including this administration, however, has offered a way to pay for it and in fact ensure you remember when the treasury, the treasury secretary years ago suggested the vehicle per mile approach they used in europe their rug was stolen out fromany deeply by mr. gib is in the press conference within 24 hours, so i don't know. maybe god is going to pay for all the infrastructure because we are cerinly hoping somebody is going to pay for it since nobody wants to pay for it but i know the land is a lot more expensive, equipment is more expensive, the aggregate, tar and people are more expensive and nobody is just going to give it to last. >> but, at the bottom line of that we are preped to support

our means to pay for it and have publicly done so. okay back here and then we will go there. >> double polymer with reuters. i want to ask a question related to president hu's visit next week. it seems often when a visitor is at the united states a number of business deals are announced. i wonder if you are expecting that next week if you have any idea which companies might be involved and if you have an estimate of the total amount and it also seems that china does this as a way to sort it distract attention from some of the trade attempts in the trade relationship. i know you talked about some o those in your speech, but will that be effective is that if china and ounces a number of big deals will that take the pressure off of them to be more forthcoming on the market access concerns? >> first of all, i am not really sure the answer to your

question. there have been recent visits where some of these things were worked out and the might me because hu is god to be traveling around the country with some business deals. i think this is a very important geopolitical visit that will address the challenges the government will as well as some of the trade issues. we will talk about the protection of intellectual property and other matters, but this is -- this isa broad visit. i hope they do some business. and people do it to distract? no. i think when people come to visit they often bring a gift. you go to someone's house for dinner you bring a bottle of wine. but seriously, i think you are calling to find a ongoing expansion and improvement in the trade relationship and the two

countries. maybe you and i ought to talk offline. i will give you a few of your thoughts. i can take two more did you say? we have one right there. >> sean higgins business investor's daily. i'm hoping you can expand about your comments on labor regulations and what it was you might be concerned with the would do and how you would respond. >> welcome a you know, go ahead. >> one chief concern is trying to kind of the essentially to a card check approach through the regulation where they have been talking about the kind of slave revolt where the members could vote from their homes, the organizers could go to their homes kind of cutting off the business ability to communicate with its employees. a cyber though it is no different an a card check vote in terms of presuring. i would remind you when you think about that issue always there in mind the congress of the united states always wants to make sure that when the vote for thespeaker or vote against

the speaker that they do it under a secret ballot. that's kind of interesting to me. >> i think the other point because card check as it was original thought about doesn't appear to have the votes right now. they are hiding it in different ways. there are literally plus or minus 100 issues within the regulatory process in the department of labour on the compensation on safety, on the workers environment, on questions of lave. they are trying to rewrite them all. i don't suppose i blame them. after all the unions spent $450 million in the last election, and they are putting tremendous pressure on the white house to get this done and this is an administration and

congress that it decided that what they were going to do on the things they couldn't get done, this was last year, they were going to push it through the regulatory process. well, welcome aboard we are going to have a lot of fun on that. and i guess i have one last question, is the right? you've got it. >> perhaps this is a good way to end this. i am with cnn and this is a somewhat abstract question. what do you make of the census results and the resulting shift of a number of seats from the old if you will manufacturing areas down to the south and whether or not business is that much better down there were life is tht much better down there. a lot of it of course is being triggered by the increasing number of hispanic pople coming into thos states. what do you make of this? in meeting you see out of it? >> bruce and i will take a shot at that. it's a good way to end. first, a whole lot of our contemporaries of decide it's

too cold and they are moving to warmer climates. second, i was going to make the point on the trade thing that the way the japanese dealt with some of the unsettling trade debates of 15 or 20 years ago is the move a lot of their car manufacturing to the united states. when they did so where did they go? they went to the carolinas, they went to texas, the went to arizona, they went to tennessee, they went to california, and it was for a number of reasons. th went because the weather, they went because the living conditions. they went because of housing, and they went because they wanted to get away from -- and there is a lot of unionization in california but they wanted to get away from the longstanding philosophy that put more cost on the back into of hiring people than they had on the front end.

i think finally you are exactly right there is some expansion hispanic population on the west coast and into a as far as particularly denver and those areas. but we have had fr years shifting movement were the congress people were. what do i make about it? i make about it that if you look at the election map and you have read it in the middle of the country and ue on one end and the other when you look at the three states that are probably insolvent may be a few others, but i will mention new york, maybe new jersey, illinois, california, those are the places people were trying to go somewhere else. >> i would add the economy isn't static. there is a lot of jobs in montana there may not be a lot people that want to go there but there's a lot of jobs in

montana, there's a lot of jobs in north dakota, there's a lot of jobs in wyoming. but part of this is an economic shift. part of it relates to what i touched on earlier when you have the 40 plus percentage drop in the auto production when one out of 12 people directly and indirectly in theunited states are tied to that one sector and obviously you were going to see some shift. you are also seeking states like north carolina create a research triangle to attract investment to attract people with certain types of skills. look, each state needs to kind of maximize and optimize what it has. they can't stand still. they've got to move forward. if you are seeing governors in some states of course starting in new jersey. mitch daniels indiana try to redirect their economies, and to make them a heckuva lot more attractive than what we have seen. now you take the stats that tom

mentioned particularly california and new jersey did great job of driving the industry away and high income households and the thousands away that are dramatically impacting, and the overarching thing that is probably in putting states more than anything else in terms of income is this decline the first ever we've experienced in housing values that has tended to be the primary revenue stream of the finance state government. so change is change and it's the only constant we are ever going to have. >> thank you very much, everyone. we appreciate your patience and participation. have a very nice day. [applause] [inaudible conversations]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> in a few moments, the final investigation on the gulf oil spill. and on "washington journal" we will be joined by tv host tavis smiley. and at 10:00 a.m., the house meets to resolve the arizona shooting. on "washington journal," thomas mann and doug brinkley. republican mike pence and tv show host tavis smiley. "washington journal" is on every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern.

we have several live events to tell you about today. treasury secretary tim geithner speaks at the school of advanced international studies on c-span 2 at 8:30 a.m. eastern. on c-span 3, the census. on c 8:00 p.m. eastern, the tucson memorial service. get your five to eight minute video on this year's topic through live thrones c-span for your chance to win the grand prize of $5,000. c-span's student cam video documentary competition is open to students grades 6--12.

>> the commission investigating the gulf of mexico oil spill is calling for more funding and training for oil industry regulators and raising the liability cap for damages caused by the oil spill. commission's final report was released in a briefing that lasted a little more than an hour. >> good morning. this past may, president obama appointed a commission to study the deep water horizon disaster. we were given several charges. first, to answer the question what happened? the second, to answer the question, what can we do to mitigate the prospects of it happening in the future, and third, what is the future of offshore drilling in the united states? i'm pleaseded to that we are submitting our report. we are submitting it on time, under budget and with a

unanimous vote of the seven members of the commission. we began our efforts six months ago with a trip to the gulf. we thought it was important to hear the voices of those who have been most affected by this tragedy. i would like to recognize the distinguished service and extraordinary work of the commission's staff, led by fred bartlett as the head of our investigative team. of iets, lawyers, d more, performed under a very tight schedules and a great public service for which we as the commission are extremely proud. i would like to give a brief overvi of our report and some of its findings, and then i will turn the podium over to my colleague and code-share, mr.

bill reilly, who will address the implications for the industry pctices in the future of offshore drilling. there is a fundament fact that the oil and gas off of our shores is an american asset. it belongs to the people of the united states of america, and thus the federal government has a dual role, it is a regulator for things such as safety into environmental protection, but it is also the land owner in a very real sense we own this property and have an obligation to respond when the public trust is abused. a fundamental finding of our x months of investigation is the deep water rise in disaster did not have to happen. -- deepwater horizon disaster

did not have to happen. that makes the enormous damage and e loss of lives even more tragic. for the past 20 years, there has been a rapid movement by the oil and gas industry to deeper and deeper, riskier and riskier areas of the gulf of mexico. this movement has generated a pundit revenues for the private companies and for the federal treasury. industry has been justifiably proud of technological advances, which have been frequently compared in sophistication to those of the space program. the federal government has benefited by the increase in revenues. what happened during that 20 year period is that we became pulled into a sense of inevitable success, an illusion

whh massed the dramatic success in risk that accompanied the deepwater spill. on april 20, after a long time are rolling the dice, our luck ran out. our investigation found significantrrors by three drilling companies, pp, halliburton -- bp, halliburton and transocean. these are described in detail in the chief counsel report. they range from bill years to properly interpret warnings -- failures to interpret warnings, flaws of not being properly understood, and late stage

design decisions. taken together, we conclude that these mistakes amounted to a significant failure of management. it is important to ehasize these errors, mistakes and magement failures were not the product of a single rope company. we believe and unveiled a systemic failure within the oil and gas industry and with than the regulation by the federal government of that industry. how did such a situation come to pass? how can it be that such questionable practices could take place when the stakes were so high? i am sad to say that part of the answer is the fact that our government let it happen, our regulators were consistently unmatched. the department of interior lack the expertise to successfully in force regulations.

there was also an internal conflict of interest within the department of interiors old minerals management service. it was a service that have the responsibility for collecting revenues, the second-largest source of revenues into the federal government, second only to the income tax, and it had the responsibility of providing an effective management of safety and protection of the environment. those two conflicting responsibilities, as we heard from three former directors of mms consistently led to revenue trumping safety as a priority of the department'. we recommend, therefore, that congress and the of ministration created independent safety administration within the department of interior with the

ability to oversee all aspects of offshore drilling safety. we believe this agency should be headed by an individual with a background in both science and management who should serve a thick term in order to be inundated by a the ability to make decisions. we also recommend bringing our offshore drilling regulations into the 21st century. it is not asking too much that our perch in the united states be equivalent of the best practices and the world. they are not that today, and sadly the united states has one of the lesser records in terms of the safety of its offshore drilling practices. the second piece of this modernization approach is called risc-based regulatory

orientation. this requires all offshore drilling companies to demonstrate that they have thoroughly evaluated all the risks associated with drilling a particular well. macondothe realities of a cond is that it turned out to be a unusually risky area to drill, high pressures, many unknowns about the geology, and yet a company with one of the worst safety records received the least in there for the entitlement for access to that area. april 20 was the consequence of the convergence of those unfortunate facts. our investigation is also demonstrating that science is not being given a significant seat at the table.

actually i thi that is a considerable understatement. it has been virtually shut out. we need proper consultation with those who have the expertise, scientists in and out of government, experts at agencies like nola and the coast guard -- these are the people that should play a major role in evaluating specific permit requests and operation of drilling rigs. it is disturbing to learn that the march 2010 decision to expand areas to additional drilling in the at the intake and eastern gulf -- in the atlantic and eastern gulf were made without looking at the potential consequences. potential consequences.