programming anytime at c- span.org. it is all searchable on arce's be a video library. c-span, washington your way. a public service created by america's cable companies. >> today on c-span. "washington journal" is next live with your phone calls. later the u.s. house. in about a half-hour, reaction to the president's state of the union speech. but we will talk to congressman chris and holland -- can holland. -- van holland. >> we know what it takes to

compete for the jobs and industries of our time. we need to out-innovate and out- educate the rest a the world -- the rest of the world. [applause] we have to make america the best place on earth to do business. we need to take responsibility for our deficit and reform our government. that's how our people will prosper. that is the future. ♪ ♪ host: in president obama's second state of the union address, he used the word jobs

45 times in a speech that spanned 62 minutes and was interrupted at least 75 times for applause. other themes included america's competitiveness, taxes, deficit, and education. after the address, the official gop response came from house budget chairman paul ryan. he talked for 10 minutes, largely focusing on the deficit and a new health care law. minnesota republican michele bachmann said she was delivering the tea party response. she spoke for about seven minutes. she also touched on health care and spending. we want to talk to all of you this morning. we will spend the full three hours of this morning's "washington journal" getting your reaction to state of the union and talking to lawmakers. the phone numbers are on your screen. here is "usa today." there news analysis piece is

written by susan page. world simon rosenberg said it is a new strategy and the second chapter of the administration. the president has replaced the hard-charging rahm emanuel with the business savvythey leave. in the meantime, his job approval has gone up, hitting the 50% water mark in the daily gallup poll this month. "he defended his signature health care law almost in passing." other front pages this morning. here is "the financial times."

it is something that the president talked about last night in his speech. he said we need to do more research and development. we will show you a little bit of that and then we will come back to your phone calls. >> this is our generation's sputnik moment. two years ago, i said we needed to reach a level of research and development of we have not seen since the height of the space race. in a few weeks, i will be spending a budget to congress that helps us meet that goal. we will invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology. [applause] and investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people. host: the republican response

was given by house budget chairman paul ryan. he talked about spending and how much has been done under this administration. >> there's no doubt the president came into office facing a severe fiscal situation. unfortunately, instead of restoring the fundamentals of economic growth, he engaged in a spending spree. not only did he fail to deliver on his promise to create jobs, but created more debt. since taking office, president obama has signed into law spending increases of 25% for domestic government agencies and an 84% increase when you include the failed stimulus. host: ron, a republican in illinois. you are first. caller: an observation. the democrats were given control of the house and senate in 2006 because president bush's budget

deficits were running $167 billion. pelosi and reid tripled it. obama tripled it again. in 2009, obama said when he raised our deficit spending $1.2 trillion, in his state of the union address, he said he would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. a five-year freeze at $1.2 trillion is not a reduction by 50%. we can do toward reform to help straighten out this national health care -- we can do tort reform. we can cut federal civilian

employee pay by 20%. that's another five under billion dollars over 10 years. there's a lot of things we could do. obama is not compromising enough with himself. he should be cutting the deficit by 50%, as he promised. that's my observation. host: ron, how can we cut the deficit by 50%? what is your timeframe for doing that? some economists argue that you cannot do that in the near term. that would have a negative impact on our fragile economy right now. caller: ok, the reason i bring up federal civilian employees pay is they are paid twice what the average american is paid with pay and benefits.

$125,000 compared to $60,000 per year. if you were very aggressive and reduced their pay by 50%, that would be a $1.25 trillion savings, not just the $500 billion savings over 10 years. that way we are keeping our promises to the american people, at least, in part, on the entitlements. host: we will hear from a democrat. cindy in fort worth, texas, you are on the air. caller: obama is nothing but a hypocrite. if you look at the speech, he said what we need to do and what we will do. that means he never had a plan to begin with. he talked about creating jobs. gm is hiring 500 workers under the taxpayers' dollars.

ge has laid off thousands of people. the thing that the guy just said -- the one thing he is wrong about is the fact that the government employees -- the civilian pay has not been kept up. what the pay was back in the 1990's is what the benefits of for now. these contractors that are working with medicaid and medicare and the cobra a's creationobam has been the lowest wages. now they are hiring people at $9 to $10 per hour with little or no benefits. host: we will leave it there. we will hear from an independent

in michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. i agree with what the young lady just said. what i was looking to hear about was jobs. in michigan, there are a lot of manufacturing jobs that are outsourced. nothing is being built here. anything that is manufactured is manufactured in very small facilities. there are no jobs. they're talking about bringing jobs -- to where? i did not hear where the jobs are going to be. if you bring 1 million jobs to michigan and there are 5 million, 6 million, 7 million citizens that need a job, you make it competitive. other people are going to come from other states to get those jobs. if those jobs did come to

michigan, they are not going to be for michigan people. everybody's glad to come for those jobs. also, listening to ron paul talk about limited government and free enterprise. that is what the housing market -- because of the chaos and de regulation. host: thank you. the first caller mentioned the spending freeze that president obama put forward last night in the state of the union address. >> tonight, i am proposing that starting this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years. this would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade and will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since dwight eisenhower was president.

this freeze will require painful cuts. already, we have frozen the salaries of hardworking federal employees for the next two years. i propose cuts to things i care deeply about, like community action programs. the secretary of defense has agreed to cut tens of billions of dollars in spending. he and his generals believe our military can do without. host: "usa today" -- "reality check here " it says, "obama spoke about the need to protect social security to get savings in health care beyond those envisioned in the law signed last year, but there were no specifics." minneapolis, patty, on the line

for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. i thought it was a farce. i thought it was ridiculous for the republicans to have a date with the democrats. they all had on their stupid ribbons. i have compassion for the congresswoman who got shot, but she is not the only one who got shot in arizona. i'm tired of politicians using her as a political ploy. i thought his speech was really boring. how could cutting the spending 50% be devastating, but increase in spending 84% in the last two years not be devastating? that's what is devastating. host: what did you think of paul ryan's response? caller: i thought it was more to the point. it is what we were clamoring for. get serious and grow up. i'm so sick of john boehner and

seeing him start crying as speaker of the house. he needs to man up. every time i looked at him, he's about ready to cry. i thought it was really a juvenile. i thought the president was ridiculous. host: before you go, michele bachmann, who is from minnesota, are you a supporter of her? caller: absolutely. the only station that had it on was cnn. i wish you guys would have had that on. you should have. you are so inclusive of every other minority group on earth. she is a big part of what is going on and what we're talking about. both of them were better than barack obama. host: here's a little bit from michele bachmann's response last night. >> unless we fully repeal

obamacare, the nation that currently enjoys the finest health care in the world might be forced to rely on government run coverage. that would have a devastating impact on our national debt for generations to come. host: on the spending freeze, here's a response from senator jim demenint. he says it does not go far enough. that was in "usa today." they also have a quote by speaker boehner dismissing the spending freeze. good morning. go ahead. caller: leaders such as our president boost morale. he did that, for example, in referring to the small roofing

company that is prospering by launching to do work on the pentagon and the gentleman who was instrumental in extricating the chilean miners. also, if you would like to hear my comments on representative ryan -- basically, that is a bedrock guy. he is capable of going anywhere he wants to, with god's help. the republicans have shown great esteem for him. i also like his stance on children -- to protect their innocence. on reducing expenses, i think it is good. i will be quick. i've already written representative paul ryan. we can cut the members of our rules and generals -- members

of admiral and generals. it has been said that we have more admirals' then ships -- admirals than ships. host: thank you. we will go to an independent in columbus, ohio. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm a member of the green party. the president offered a tax break for college students. once again, we have the federal government subsidizing something. if you subsidize ethanol, you get rich farmers. the colleges never lower their costs. they are far above the cost of living. their costs -- we have made economic slaves out of our students.

it is because of the subsidies. if we were not subsidizing the colleges, they would hold firm on their cost. in ohio state, we have 30 administrators that make over $100,000 per year. this is outrageous. try to get one representative for the president to say buy american. they will not say that. they are all global list. they send our jobs overseas. they have to make changes. host: more on that spending battle to come. hours before the speech, the gop house voted to cut the federal budget by returning domestic agencies to the 2008 budget level. "president obama talk about the spending and how far he was willing to go last night."

>> i recognize that some in this chamber have proposed deeper cuts. i'm willing to eliminate whatever we can honestly afford to do without. let's make sure we are not doing it on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens. [applause] let's make sure that what we are cutting is really excess weight. cutting the deficit by gutting our investments in innovation and education is like lightening an overloaded airplane by removing its engine. it may make you feel like you are flying high at first, but it will not take long before you feel the impact. host: the reality check in"usa today."

lexington, south carolina. raymond on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: thank you for c-span and everything you do. i want to make a comment on what is missing from the speech and what has been missing for the last two years from the obama administration. it is the war against drugs. understand that the children are our future. their future is getting squashed because of the drug dealers on

the streets. you have children trying to fight each other for drugs. where is the war on drugs? these kids are being medicated to prevent them from becoming productive members of society. if you want to make some serious spending cuts, talk about these legislatures. these congressmen and senators get lifetime benefits. they work for us. they get a job for two years and they get a lifetime insurance benefits and pensions. it is nonsense. it does not make any sense. they work for us. i do not get those kind of benefits. host: one of the news portions of last night's speech was what president obama had to say on the corporate tax rate but we will talk about that with members of congress. here is "the washington times."

you can take a look at the list. we will go on to houston, texas. pat on the line for independents, good morning. you are on the air. caller: there's nothing the president could have said that would have satisfied the republicans. host: ok. rochester, new york. tony, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: good morning. what is your reaction? caller: prior to the state of the union, people said we needed to get along with each other. there were rumors that they needed to break the filibuster and the senate. i'm troubled about this. there are 26 states in our union that have joined the federal

lawsuit to repeal health care. we have the senate majority leader, harry reid, who is orchestrating the filibuster and not allowing the repeal to come up. there are 24 senate democrats that are up for re-election in 2012. 17 of those states governors and attorney general's have filed a suit to repeal health care. you have at&t, caterpillar, health careaying will cost them billions of dollars. i think it is kind of appalling to the american people that one senator can filibuster and not allow the repeal to go forward. there are 26 democrats up for reelection. it is not popular in their

state. it is costing the american people -- the other thing -- i'm in rochester. i by car insurance in california. i can by car insurance, but i cannot buy health insurance across state lines. host: the health care law was part of last night's speech and the gop's response from paul ryan. here's what the budget chairman had to say. >> costs are going up. premiums are rising. millions of people will lose the coverage they currently have. job creation is being stifled. businesses and unions from around the country are asking the obama administration for waivers from the mandates. washington should not be in the

business of picking winners and losers. the president mentioned the need for regulatory reform to ease the burden on american businesses. we agree. we think the health care law would be a great place to start. host: an independent in oakland, california. your thoughts on the state of the union. caller: the previous caller made the comment that you probably could not please most of the republicans. i really believe that they should try to get back to some core republican things that worked. when i grew up, there was quite a bit of boom and prosperity. there was a lot of prosperity with president eisenhower. i believe if they would return the tax rate to the top 10%, to

the rates they were during president eisenhower, that's the way the government could afford to do big projects like the interstate highway system. if they want to do those things, you cannot just keep rolling the budget below what you need for necessities. sometimes you have to get a second job. the wealthier people that have been benefiting for the last 10 years or 15 years, if they paid their fair share of taxes, that my balance the budget. during president eisenhower, the tax rate was 90% on the upper 10%. they could just raise it to 50%. i imagine they could still afford their mercedes. host: in other news, president obama will travel to wisconsin this morning to talk more about what he said in the state of the union address and a strategy for

the economy. cbo will release its budget and economic outlook today at 11:00 a.m. house republicans have indicated they will try to pass a resolution next week. house budget chairman paul ryan established a discretionary non spending levels for the remainder of the year. the cbo will release its 2011 economic outlook today. tennessee, catherine on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: i watched it last night on television. the president seems to not know what he is doing. i originally grew up on the west coast in oregon and washington. when i moved to tennessee, i realized they do not have a recycling program here.

they do not have the program to donate time for health care. that is the reason we are suffering. they are not understanding that we have to go with what is working. what is working might be working in one state, but it is not even existed in another. because of that, it is really -- because of that, it is ruining our entire system. if there are no jobs out there, how can i go out and get a job? the president says this will help with these jobs. where? is it going to be in my neighborhood? i do not know. host: "the chicago tribune" -- rahm emanuel is back on the ballot for mayor for now. the supreme court agreed to give the case an expedited review.

"the washington post" says -- "emanuel's mayoral bid gets a boost from obama." fairfax, virginia. john on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. first, a small criticism of "washington journal." we all know about rahm emanuel and we know that story. that takes time. what i want to tell the audience is that the republican party is dedicated to keeping the rich from paying their fair share. they are not going to pay their

fair share. the republicans came up with the term "star of the beast" many years ago. what that means is to make the government too broke to help the common people. that's why we have the war that is why we have the deficit. the government is too poor to help the common people. . host: dwayne on the line for independents. good morning. you are on the air. caller: first, the lady talking about the war on drugs -- we are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a war that has not beeing won. i would like to know what the government plans to do for rural communities.

there are no jobs and there is nobody creating any. your governor is not going to support you in an rural area. host: we will go to kevin, a republican in dallas, texas. good morning. caller: good morning. i come from a republican background. my family has always been republican. one thing they do not do is play politics. to me, this seems like a big game that everybody is playing. this combat that has been going on against the democrats and republicans. we should all be working together. barack obama is our president. we should honor our president. we're just going to disagree with him on everything. he is our president. let's work together. that's the way i'm looking at it. barack obama is talking about

innovating and asking us to take responsibility. people say that is something that we should just -- it's a bunch of hooey. you have to believe in yourself and we have to take responsibility. each one of us has to build our country together. host: that was a republican in dallas, texas. we are going to continue our coverage of the state of the union on "washington journal" for the full three hours. we will get your reaction and your thoughts. joining us from capitol hill will be several members of congress. representative chris van hollen, democrat of maryland, is standing by. if i could just begin with president obama's comments last night that he proposes a five- year spending freeze on discretionary spending. what was your reaction? what do you think? guest: good morning.

i doubt the president signaled that he was very serious. he pointed out that families across the country are engaged in belt-tightening and the federal government has to do the same thing. at the same time, he said that we have to prioritize and we need to continue to make investments in things like clean energy and things that can make sure that we maintain our competitive age -- competitive edge. the president talked about this in our sputnik moment. none of us should be settling for #two -- for number two. host: on the spending side, do you agree and do think the rest of the democrats are going to agree to this five-year freeze? guest: this is going to require painful choices, but yes, i think we will be able to come together to support the president's proposal in that regard. as he indicated, it will require

prioritizing. that is what we have to do. even as we do that, we have to work together to put together a sustainable, long-term plan for deficit and debt reduction. that's an important component. host: where do you see compromise on spending cuts? guest: we are at the beginning of the process. we should always be looking for efficiency gains and productivity gains. then you get into cutting into the meat of some of these things. it's easy to talk in general terms, but it's much more difficult when it comes to specific programs. that's why we challenged our republican colleagues, who are calling for some immediate, deep, draconian cuts, to let us know if they're planning on cutting research in cancer and diabetes around the country or exactly where they are proposing to cut. the president laid out a

responsible path last night. there are some who are calling for a very deep and immediate cuts. that is actually against the advice of the bipartisan commission charged with deficit and debt reduction. they said we have got to put our country on a sustainable path going forward and we need to act now to do that. they also said the media, draconian cuts would hurt the economy and slow down drug -- slowdown job growth. host: let's go to michigan. dave, you are on the air with representative chris van hollen. caller: i want to talk about health insurance. i bought some car insurance that was out of the state of michigan. when i wrecked my car, they just would not pay to get it fixed. it happens all the time with these out-of-state insurance companies. now i switched over to aaa and i

have no problem. i would never buy insurance, especially health insurance, across state lines. host: congressman? guest: the caller raises a very important point about consumer protection. some of these easy-sounding solutions put forward by our colleagues on the other side of the aisle and can jeopardize patient and consumer protection preview did not want to buy insurance from a fly by night operation. as part of the health reform bill, we did say that the federal office of personnel management will be able to put together national structures that will allow consumers to be able to purchase insurance in a way that they know will safeguard their interest. in some ways, it's modeled after the federal employees health benefit plan. it allows that purchasing power, but with the protections that

you would have in the state system. for example, the protections that members of congress have as part of their plan. host: rich on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: he has had two years to create jobs for u.s. citizens. he has created jobs for china. he has also had a problem with the legal -- with illegals coming in. now he wants to add 400,000 job more a month that he does not have four more in legal -- for more illegals to come in. guest: first of all, as i think

people doing this program know, two years ago, when the president was sworn in, our economy was in total freefall. we were in deep recession and headed toward another great depression. the president and congress had to act quickly. as a result, millions of people have jobs today who would otherwise be out of work. that is not me saying that. you have economists from all sides of the political spectrum recognizing that things would be a lot worse. we all understand that when you have a 9.5% unemployment rate, that is cold comfort to people who do not have a job. that is why the president's focus last night was on accelerating the economic recovery and putting people back to work. some of those proposals are already beginning. for example, he created a tax incentive for businesses to invest immediately by allowing them to write off 100% of their

investment over the next year. he is also focused on the long term. when he called it the sputnik moment, he was saying that we are not going to settle for no. for number two.tle we know it is essential to our competitiveness in the international arena. host: as ranking member on the house budget committee, what was your reaction given by your paul ryan chairman paul, republican of -- what was your reaction to paul ryan's response? guest: i agree that it is important for both parties to work together to try to tackle the deficit and debt. that is what the president said last night. he is serious about getting together with members of congress on both sides of the aisle to do exactly that. i was disappointed that paul ryan spent a fair amount of time

about -- spent a fair amount of time talking about repealing the health care bill. i don't think people want to start from scratch. people understand the important consumer and patient protections that are in that bill. for example, your kids cannot be denied health insurance because they have diabetes or asthma. you can keep your kids on your policy until the age of 26. small businesses are getting tax credits. i do not think people want to wipe out all that stuff. we recognize that we need to make the changes and adjustments as we move along. this preoccupation with throwing out the whole thing -- i think that takes us in the wrong direction. as the non-partisan an independent congressional budget office indicated, it would also add to our deficit. that health care bill began to bend to the cost curves over a period over time c-span.org over

a period of time. the caller addressed immigration. the president has beefed up border security -- doing more to ensure we enforce the laws of the country. we recognize this is a problem we need to solve together. that's what he was talking about. host: we mentioned that the congressional budget office will be coming out with its outlook for 2011. what are you expecting? guest: i think it will show that the economy is improving. as a result, there will be more revenues coming into the government. obviously, the most important thing about the economy improving is when people get back to work. that needs to be the focus of our efforts. the congressional budget office report will also indicate that we have large deficits and debt

in the out years. that is why it is important that we act now to put in place a plan that reduces the deficit. it has got to be a balanced plan that takes us to much lower deficits and eliminating the debt over a period of time. it is counterproductive to try to do all that in six months. that would be a recipe for hurting the economy and throwing people out of work. host: when will democrats put forward a plan that take on entitlement programs like social security and medicare? guest: the bipartisan commission put a lot of ideas on the table. we need to go through a process with our republican colleagues to figure out how we can come together on some things. if it will require give-and- take. a good model was when former president reagan came together

with former speaker of the house o'neill to deal with the social security at that time. i believe that people can come together. everybody has got to be willing to give a little bit. host: susan is joining us on the line for independents. good morning. guest: i was calling in to get my comments about the speech. the president is a very good speaker. my concern is that he really did not address the real problems that this country is facing. that does disturb me a little bit. the fact is -- the recession ended 18 months ago. they have not been able to create any jobs. the economy is growing, but i'm really doubtful that this growth is based on anything real in the economy. i think it is more a result of money printing and inflating the

economy with quantitative easing. that is usually good for the stock market's to -- markets to rise. it does improve the gdp. once that ends, what is like to happen? host: let's get a response from the congressman. guest: the caller put her finger on the key issue we are facing today. that is how to get more people back to work and how we bring down the unemployment rates. as the president indicated last night, he's trying to make sure a lot of the capital is on the sidelines. a lot of corporations have good bottom lines. the challenge is to get them to invest more today. that's why we initiated this 100% immediate appreciation for

investments over the next year -- to try to get more of that money invested in jobs. the president also outlined a couple of other ideas. for example, trying to have a more rational corporate income- tax rate, where you bring down the rates, but close a lot of the loopholes. for the longer terms, he said -- for the longer term, he said we have to invest in education and research and development. he mentioned a couple things throughout our history that have had huge benefits for the private sector and the american people. when you are dealing with countries like china and india that are competing hard in the international marketplace, we cannot marketplacenumber two. we have to invest to make sure that we remain competitive and

make sure that the future continues to be bright for our kids. host: tracy on the line for democrats. go ahead. caller: they're talking about freezing social security. he had already frozen it for the last two years. he has already done damage to people who are on social security. the doctors should take what the insurance or medicare pays in full. what they're doing is attacking on more and more -- is tacking on more and more and then you have to file bankruptcy because you cannot get out of it. guest: let me respond to that. when the president talked about a five-year freeze on domestic discretionary spending, that does not include a freeze on

social security or medicare. those are mandatory spending programs and those are not subject to the president's freeze. as you indicated, there have not been increases because the rate of inflation has been low. we recognize that has put a burden on many seniors. we tried to do something about that. unfortunately, our colleagues opposed it. as the caller said and the president mentioned last night, we need to make sure we have a rational tax system. that is why the president said we can no longer afford to continue these large tax breaks for the people at the very top. in other words, we are not going to be cutting back social security and medicare that helps middle class america in order to pay for these tax cuts for the folks at the very top. that would hurt the middle class.

, thankhris van hollen van you so much for your time. guest: thank you. host: on the senate side, senator charles grassley joins us. i want to begin where mr. van hollen left off. that is what the president had to say on taxes. i want to show our viewers what the taxes said when it comes to lobbyists and the tax code. >> over the years, a parade of lobbyists has benefited companies and industries. those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. the rest of us are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. it makes no sense and it has to

change. [applause] tonight, i am asking democrats and republicans to simplify the system, get rid of the loopholes, and level the playing field. use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years. host: senator grassley, what is your reaction? guest: i agree with the president. there are many in this town that go to sophisticated ways to think up and even a copyright and patent certain tax principles. in a bill coming up that senator leahy and i introduced, we want to do away with that. he is absolutely right. there is an industry. you have an industry that

benefits from it. do not forget that you created an industry that got this stuff up. the president is -- the president did not say this, but he is calling for reducing the marginal tax rate on corporate taxes. we are the second highest corporate tax rate all around the world. that makes us very un competitive. there's a principle of law that the president did not express. it says that when you lower marginal tax rates, you broaden the tax base. that's basically what the president is asking us to do. the only thing i would disagree with the president on, if he is saying that to bring in more revenue, you should not be increasing taxes during a recession, but particularly -- you know the old principle. if you increase taxes, you get less of it. if you want to increase employment, you do not increase

taxes on the people that provide jobs in america. host: the president said that the wealthiest americans could sacrifice a little and pay higher taxes in order to tackle the deficit so that we can start to make a dent in that situation. guest: you are bringing up another item. what the president was talking about was the corporate tax rate. you are bringing up about the individual tax rate and that is a legitimate point for you to bring up. i think we discuss that when we get out of the recession. there's a principle that even the president agreed with in 2009 that when you are in a recession, you should not increase taxes. he ran in 2008 on a platform of increasing taxes on higher income people. before he was sworn in, he announced -- we are in a

recession and cannot increase taxes during a recession. i would remind the president that the same principle applies. let's talk about it after we get out of a recession. you should not increase taxes while you're in a recession. host: senator, we heard a lot about the overhaul of the tax code. what did you make of that? guest: that is a continuation of the discussion you and i just had. it follows along the lines -- the president is taking off from what his own debt reduction commission has suggested. you get into the same principle we just talked about. we need to reduce the corporate tax rates. we need to have fewer brackets. we need to have lower brackets. when you reduce tax rates, you can broaden the tax base. exactly which one of those you pick and choose or do you do

away with all of them -- that will have to be a point of discussion when you get down to the finite issues of what exactly to eliminate. there's a couple sensitive ones that are very difficult to deal with politically and economically. one of those deals with the charitable this -- charitable production. the other is the home mortgage production -- mortgage reduction. host: james on the line for republicans. go ahead. caller: senator grassley, what do you think about the president's comment last night about education and the public schools? guest: i will tackle it from one. of spending money and another point that does not cost any money. it is probably more important

than anything the president said. in the last two years, he said this two or three times. i wish he would say this every day. he said that the most important thing we can do to further education is for parents to be more involved in the education of their kids. education is important. book learning is more important than television. homework is more important than television. parents ought to make sure that the teachers work that they send home gets done. the teachers are not in the home. weekends are not something just for relaxation. if you look at how education is in asia -- they are running away with us in science and math. you find out that they do a lot of studying on the weekends. we do not seem to emphasize that in this country. i feel strongly about what the

president said. i agree with him. i wish the president could tell me how i can help him promote that. i would like to. the second issue involves money. i think we have to look at different costs of money spent on education around the country. a kind of tells you that money is not a total solution to the problem of education. in washington, d.c., they spend maybe $13,000 per student free look at what they spend in iowa. they spend maybe $8,000 per student. you would think that if you spend more money you get better education. no. kids do not graduate from high school year. the ones that graduate -- a lot of them are functionally illiterate. you don't find that in cedar falls, iowa, as an example. we need to look at how we are spending money in education and

not just throw money at it. host: let's listen to what the president had to say about education. >> raced to the top is the most meaningful reform of our public schools in a generation. for less than 1% of what we spend on education each year, it has led 40 states to raise their standards. these standards were developed, not by washington, but by democrats and republicans across the country. race to the top should be the approach we follow this year as we replace no child left behind with a law that is more flexible and focused on what is best for our kids. host: your reaction to the state of the union. we are talking to charles grassley. baltimore, maryland. eric on the line for independents. good morning. caller: good morning.

you are one of the few republicans i really respect in congress. i keep hearing how president obama has spent more than any other president. we have to look at the reality of things. when he came into office, he basically came in trying to clean up the mess that bush made. he bailed out the banks. he gave tax cuts to the richest 1%. if you look at the dow jones, they are almost at 12,000. they have money. they are not investing. they're sending business is overseas. to keep perpetuating that obama spend this money crazily -- i do not want to hear that. that is rhetoric and politics. host: let me read a tweet that echoes of that caller. guest: those statistics and that

tweet are wrong. it went from 37 million. it is back to 38 million. whoever said that bush did not create any jobs, they better go back and look at the statistics. the caller from maryland who -- just who -- from maryland that just finished -- i would like to say i agree with a lot of what he said. a lot of wear president obama -- obama getstpresident hit legitimately -- the last years has accumulated almost $4 trillion in debt. that is over the last two years. that's compared to $10 trillion over the last 225 years.

maybe things president obama thought he should do, like the stimulus bill and increasing appropriations the last two years by 22% -- i think he thought he was doing well, but it just did not work. it added a great deal to the deficit. host: here is an e-mail from a viewer. she says this. guest: well, first of all, we would say that for a period of time, yes, the government can spend when consumers are not

spending -- to fill a vacuum. there was a legitimacy to that. the point is that what was spent did not do what it was supposed to do. that $814 billion that went into the stimulus package, you get to a point where only 1/2 of 1% of that went into a small business. small business creates a 72% of new jobs. more of it should have been put into small businesses. government consumes well, but government does not create wealth. only about 3% went into building roads and other infrastructure. more should have gone into that, rather than just spending the way congress traditionally spends. on the taxes that the person brought up ini would be willingr raising taxes if it went to the bottom line.

in other words, a dollar raised went to a dollar reduction in the deficit. but there are several studies over the last 30, 40 years, and maybe even 50 years, that show that when congress increases taxes, it is a license to spend $1.15. that is the lowest figure. there are some that go to $1.69. so i use the lowest figure of $1.15. that increases the deficit. so what we have to do is make sure that the problem then is on the spending side, not on the taxing side. that is kind of where we are. it is like a dog chasing its tail. host: with the president said -- talked about making these types of investments, do you see middle ground between democrats and republicans? guest: i think so. you'll find that later this

year, in the transportation bill that comes up. it should have come up two years ago, but because of the recession, you cannot increase taxes during a recession. it has been extended from five years ago. but i think we will get to a point where we will have a major debate on infrastructure this year. host: let's go to nashville, tennessee. catherine joins us on the republican line. caller: good morning. i wanted to ask -- well, me and my husband are small business owners. we own a small business. when i want to go and spend for my company, i put in for a government grant. i never heard back. how i it -- when i -- how a mice with to how am i supposed to expand my business when the governments system has put

the money every which way and is not willing to help small businesses? guest: i will give you some advice on how i would handle the problem if you are an iowa constituent. i do not know whether you are entitled to that grant or not. i would not know until i looked into it. but if you have not contacted your congressman or senator, that congressman or senator cannot get you anything that the law does not allow you to have. but you said you never got an answer. everybody that is doing business with the federal government is entitled to an answer. it may not be the answer that you want, but you ought to know that you have been given fair consideration by the people that work in any program that you think you qualify for. so i would suggest that you get your congressman or senator on that point because that is what i do for my constituents in

iowa. host: let's go to international falls in minnesota. paul, you are on the air with senator grassley. caller: thank you for taking my call, and give me a little time to talk to him here, please. the thing of it it is, why don't we take back the tax breaks of these people taking our jobs overseas? that is a good question for this gentleman because the republicans should open the bill up. host: what is he talking about? guest: i can answer his question. he is talking about bills over the last year that tax income overseas before is brought home. the constituents in minnesota -- the constituent in minnesota asked a good question. we are the only country in the world that taxes goods overseas

when it comes home. every other country pays when it is home. we need to change to a territorial tax system so we are on a level playing field with every other country. as long as the lot is the way it is right now and we do not change to a territorial system, i want to tell the gentlemen that we could change the tax laws the way he wants to, and then instead of just sending manufacturing jobs overseas, you would have a lot of corporate headquarters moved up and go overseas so you would lose jobs and not gain jobs by doing what he is advocating. host: james, an independent in lancaster, ohio, the last phone call for senator grassley. caller: yes, senator grassley, you touched on the tax breaks recently as far as extending -- as sending the jobs overseas. i think the solution to that

problem is let's not have businesses go overseas, let's keep them in the united states. i am a blue-collar working class american that has skilled labor and a college degree, but i am forced to work waiting tables at the waffle house to get by every day. i want to know when tax cuts will start coming my way. the president touched in his speech, the most powerful thing i think he said was americans sacrifice on a daily basis to live within their means. they need a government that does the same. i guess my question truly is, you know, how is that not only going to apply at the figurative level, but also on a liliteral level? guest: i am glad to answer your question. first of all, the tax policy we have right now was passed in 2001, and it was going to expire

in 2010. it has been continued for two years, and that was a bipartisan agreement with the president just before christmas. and by extending it for two years, you avoid the biggest tax increase in history without even a vote in congress. now, i don't know your situation, but let me tell you that everybody that paid income tax in 2001 and ever since -- if you are paying income tax, you got a tax break in the 2001 tax bill and you are still continuing to get it. host: senator grassley, thank you for talking to our viewers this morning. we appreciate it. guest: and thank you to c-span for your in-depth coverage. host: we will continue that in a minute. in a few minutes we'll talk with senator chris coons, who beat a challenge from christine

o'donnell who was backed by the tea party with 57% of the vote. i want to show you the editorial pages this morning. here is "usa today" with their thoughts on the state of the union. "obama set date objectives, lacks leadership on debt." letting tax breaks expire will not pay for immediate investments are rich -- or reduce long-term deficit. they say mr. obama paid to simplify it -- did not call for raising other taxes. americans may not want to hear that taxes have to go up, but until mr. obama and other political leaders are willing to say so, credible deficit reduction will remain out of reach. that is "the new york times" this morning, their editorial. fort worth, texas, what are your thoughts on the state of the union?

caller: i want to remind my fellow americans that when republicans are in charge, they have always raised the deficit. when reagan was president, we had a big deficit. when george w. bush was in the white house, there was not a bill that he did not stop or even think about not signing. they were spending money and did not have any care, did not even have the wars on the budget that we have in congress. i like the idea that we have a divided government. maybe now they will do what the american people expect them to do, to do their jobs. i have a question -- is there going to be a freeze on their salary increases? because i know they give themselves raises in the middle of the night when nobody else is watching. is there going to be a freeze on the congressmen and senators'

salary? i want to mention one more thing. when the cities have companies coming to their towns, they give them tax breaks. they do not have to pay taxes for 30 or 40 years, so we need to take that into consideration. host: a lot of speculation yesterday on how many supreme court justices would show up last night. here is "the washington post." and six of them were in attendance. justice kennedy, chief justice roberts, along with ruth bader ginsburg, steven briar, elena kagan, and sonia sotomayor as well. michigan, good morning. so yes, i was trying to talk to the representative there. i guess i will try to wake the american people up to the thought that, you know, president kennedy made a speech

and nobody ever talks about what he spoke of, a shadowy people behind the scenes, doing military and different financial things that are not publicized but are hidden. and the centers are silenced the way they silenced him. also president lincoln talked about a central banking system and he was assassinated. jackson spoke against the central banking system, and they tried to assassinate him. i'm thinking that nobody is talking about people with the money for the people with the money created this situation. nobody goes to jail, nobody gets outbid on this situation. they talk to us like we are ignorant, that is so complicated that nobody understood it. people who think, people who are trained, people who plan -- people need to understand that these people are educated and

intelligent. the people with the money made money. host: we will leave it there. up and russell rotunda this morning is senator christopher koontz. let me ask christopher koons. did the president go far enough with jobs? guest: i think he went far last night laying out a clear vision to restore competitiveness, reinvest in the things we need to be making, bipartisan efforts to support and restructure and streamline our government, to restore the economy and get it back on track, getting people back to work. i think he hit the mark in terms of focusing on jobs and competitiveness. host: do you think he has done enough so far? guest: i think congress and the president devoted a lot of time

over the past those those years to the issue of health care and financial services reform, those those very important issues, changing the culture of wall street and changing the challenges that face every american in terms of health care. now is the time -- i just joined the congress and the lame-duck session after my special election. now is the time to focus relentlessly on jobs, recovery, and the economy. the american people expect us to not just recover but lay the foundation for a long-term sustained growth, to make the tough choices that will make us competitive again. it was good beat britain focused on areas like education and innovation where we once led the world, where we have lost a little bit of our engineer we need a renewed focus. so his metaphor that we need to change direction that we will win the future is fundamentally right. i look forward to working with democrats and republicans in both houses of congress to make

those tough choices. i'm taking the floor tomorrow for my first speech as a senator to focus on manufacturing, and make manufacturing not just possible but stronger in the days ahead. host: what are your specific proposals? guest: i am interested in a whole series of issues like education and training, tax and trade. i'm a coda sponsor on the pact reform act of 2011. -- i'm a co-sponsor on the impact reform act of 2011. host: on the other side of the coin, the spending issue and making cuts. the president proposed a five- year freeze. republicans have said we need to go farther. the republican response given by the budget chairman of the house side, paul ryan, said that the situation is spiraling out of control. where do you see agreements? where do you agree with republicans on spending cuts? guest: i think everything needs

to be on the table. as the president said last night, for us to only focus on non-defense discretionary spending is not to focus on a broad solution. and a bipartisan debt commission, which the president charged with coming up with a broad, positive solution, came back with some challenging suggestions. i was pleased the president to cut because of tax reform last night. i think there are ways we can significantly simplify our tax code and both reduce rates, corporate and individual, and ultimately increase the amount of revenue brought in to the federal government. the best way to deal with our deficit in the short term is to grow the economy and get people back to work, but we will have to take a look at everything, at the whole mix of expenses and revenue of the federal government if we will be serious about tackling the debt that threatens to strangle productivity and competitiveness for the long term. host: let's get our callers involved.

sandy, a democrat from california, you're on the air with chris coons. good morning. good morning senator and c-span audience. what i took away from the president's speech last night was a visionary plan to put our country on a sustainable path of growth without education, without the investment in research and development, without capital investments in equipment and factories that make things in this country, we cannot go forward as a country. science and research are one of the pillars of the american

economy. if we are not teaching our kids to compete in the 21st century, we do not have a country. i love the fact that the president is willing to take a hard luck at the operations of our government and make some hard choices. host: senator? guest: i agree with sandy that we need to make hard courses about streamlining and focusing our government so it it makes priorities out of the things that we have to target in order to be competitive in the 21st century. i agree that innovation, inventiveness has long been a hallmark of the american society. part of our real problems is that we invent things still at a great rate, but we do not protect them in terms of intellectual property laws, we do not protect and internationally in terms of being tougher on trade laws, and we allow them to go overseas and let manufacturing happen in other parts of the world.

i was pleased to hear the president focused on the whole continuum from education, kate- 12 innovation -- k-12 innovation, but also making sure that we get our real people to go and finish college. and to make sure that we're trying to retain an american manufacturing of things made in america. i think the president laid out a path forward for how to make us competitive. host: who did you sit next to last night? guest: i sat between jim inhofe of oklahoma and john tester of -- we had a great half-hour conversation as we were lining up in the senate chamber on the way over. by the time we got to the floor, there was only one mtc in the area we headed toward, so he urged me -- there was only one empty seat in the area we headed toward.

we had good conversations before the state of the union began. host: what do you think will happen going forward? will you continue to talk to your republican colleagues? had you come up with a meeting? what will you do? guest: absolutely. senator isaacson of georgia has agreed to be a mentor to me. we have a program for freshmen senators where we get matched up with folks who have volunteered, both democrats and republicans, to serve as mentors to us individually and staff to staff so that our chief of staff and legislative directors get to know there's. senator isaacson of georgia has been very gracious with his time. i have had some time with some -one discussions with senators. we should not compromise our core principles but we need to find areas of common energy and interest and make the reasoned

demises in order to get going and get our act -- compromises in order to get going and get our country back on track. it was very different from any state of the union i have seen in the last decade were previously there has been one side leaping up and the other side saying seated -- staying seated, glumly and grimly. i thought it was a positive step for our country. host: did you feel constrained to stay in your seat? guest: no, i applaud it when i felt i needed to, and there were some moments where the chamber was more reserved. there was a somber tone with the president beginning with the tucson shootings and challenging all of us to be more civil in our town and focus on the business of the country. i do think it was a more policy- oriented speech, a more

visionary speech, west of the laundry list of partisan initiatives and more of a focus on the long term, and i frankly think that is a good thing. host: robert, an independent, from virginia, welcome to the conversation. caller: i was kind of disappointed last night because obama had campaigned on redistributing the wealth, and that is not going to happen. it looks like he has forgotten about it. when he did say something about taking things away from the oil companies, john boehner's face turned to stone, so that is not going to happen either. people cannot start a small business because the big corporations do not want competition, and they are the ones pretty much in control of our country, not the politicians. i think america had the chance last night to be great again,

but the media -- host: senator, what is your reaction to those comments? guest: there are folks in our country or angry, and many people have reason to be so. they feel congress is not paying attention to their concerns and they really challenge just to prove that we will be responsive and bear down and focus on the reason people sent us here. one of the things that i think is great about representing the state of delaware is that the discourse in my state is pretty simple, fairly centrist and people respect each other. i am hopeful that folks in this country, both here in washington and throughout the country, will double their efforts to give each other the benefit of the doubt, the patient to listen, to do less arguing at each other and more working together. i really think that was the direction the president tried to point us in last time.

host: john, republican, from san antonio, texas. you're on the air. caller: good morning. i have a problem with senator , with most of them there because nobody is talking about -- to pay public employees, it is about three times greater than those in the private sector. yet nobody is talking about reducing their pay to the private sector level. unless we can do these things, i am thinking in terms of they have to have a plan to start the confiscation of private property to pay for government so that they can live the good life, so to speak, which you are living right now. overall, the speech was great. but the problem we have is not the rich. the rich is not set tax policy. i need everybody who is

listening to understand that. government sets tax policy. the only reason we have the poor in the government today is because of government. look at the pay government debts for says the board. guest: what was the question? host: look at government pay versus the poor. guest: i think the assertion there was that the government worker makes three times what the private sector employee does. a private sector person who works for a private-sector job before going into government, i would just disagree. government employees have better pensions and health care, but there are relatively few places i have ever heard of were government employees make three times or even significantly more than the private sector, so i just disagree with the premise of the question. the larger challenge is, how do we come up with a path forward that manages the cost of operating government that makes a more streamlined and focused?

that is something that i think all as will have to turn our attention to. host: senator, what about your background? will that help you in your new job? guest: i think the combination of the six years i spent running a local government as county executive in my home state of delaware, the second- largest government in our admittedly small state where i had to balance the budget every year, make cuts in expenditures, where i cut the pay of the county employees, my own pay and the pay of every other county employee two years in a row to balance the budget is an important operating experience -- an important operating experience. the eight years where we're innovating and manufacturing and being successful and competitive as an american-based company in a global economy -- i think the at combination of those experiences and at roswell me -- to really tackle the challenges facing our country. host: carl, any depended in

virginia. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing well. do you have a comment for the senator? caller: i think the senator and the government there -- you are elected to govern first. ok, govern. let's cut the federal pay by 10%. the state should follow suit. and this will help on the national debt and we will reduce what we know. it would reduce the cost of living because there would be a triple-down effect. nobody would be competing for all the government -- a trickle- down effect. nobody would be competing for all the government jobs. thank you. host: what are your thoughts? guest: i have had a little trouble with my earpiece. forgive me. if i understood right, the question is, not just simply an across-the-board cut of government employees, of 10%, and then we will have trickled-

down effects across the government. i did lead in initiative in delaware where i cut my pay and all my senior people by 7%, and the whole county work force by 5% two years running, and it meant the groundwork for a comprehensive solution to the budget crisis of 2009, 2010, where i'm from. the president last night proposed freezing federal pay over five years, a significant reduction, $400 billion over a decade, if i'm not mistaken, in non-defense, non-discretionary. that is the opening move the president will make in congress, and we will need to focus on suggestions that will cut how much we're spending, that will cut the total size of the federal work force that will streamline and focus the work that we're doing here in congress. but i will also say i support the idea of in a few targeted areas, whether medical research

or development of new clean technologies, whether it is in reinvesting in infrastructure or education -- in fighting for those areas where we need to make investment a priority, we need to cut and spend in a way that allows us to grow the economy to the best way to get out of this deficit situation is get people back to work across the country. the private sector creates jobs, not government, but the government can provide a central and critical support for private sector growth by making sure we have got the infrastructure, we have got the work force, and we have the level playing field and international trade that the private sector asked us to help provide for them. host: senator chris coons, come back to "the washington journal." we go back to representative cynthia lummis, republican, wyoming, appropriations

committee member. thank you for coming on "washington journal." where do you think there are areas of compromise from last night? guest: i was pleased that the president chose to talk about the importance of rationalizing our tax code. there seems to be some agreement there. host: what do you hear on earmarks? as a member of the appropriations committee, the president says he will veto a bill that has earmarked in it. guest: well, we will not send a bill with your marks, because the republicans and democrats have agreed to bills with no earmarks. host: at want to talk about your plan for cutting spending, because you were mentioned in a recent "wall street journal" piece written by dick armey, and they said scaling back the number of government employees the fiscal year 2008 will save about $35 billion.

a fight that according to calculations made by your office. i want to get your reaction to stephen pearlstein's argument this morning in "the washington post come out where he says instead of invest and grow, republicans offered cut and grow, which will take its place in the pantheon of economic nonsense. guest: i disagree with that point. i have -- i am from a state that has a boom-and-bust economy that is tied to the mineral industry, and we have seen our economy go up and down over the years. we have seen our government expand and shrink accordingly, and our fiscal house is in order in wyoming. we have a robust economy. we have less than the national average unemployment. and so i can point to my own state as an example of a state that has been responsible with its fiscal health, and the economy has benefited accordingly.

host: on the issue of energy and investing more resources into alternative energy, what do you make of what the president says? guest: i am concerned -- i like what he said, but i am unhappy with what he does because behind the scenes, the epa and the department of the interior are passing onerous regulations that are limiting our ability in the united states to produce oil, gas, coal, uranium, even at all that would come from downed trees in our national forests, off the table. we are very limited by this administration. so what i hear and what i see the president do are two different things. host: karen is waiting to talk to you, a republican from santa maria, california. caller: thank you for letting me talk on the air. i am researching to find out

about having green jobs and taking a percentage of the profit to help non-partisan government operations, and i'm thinking that that might be a good option for public schools as well. i am also thinking that for grants, if people get grants, that maybe 10% of the profit of businesses that are funded by grants, 10% of profit could go to run non-partisan operations and help run the public schools. i would like your reaction on that, please. guest: thank you, caller. i am a firm believer that states should be the drivers behind education policy and education funding. constitution, it specifically says that the state is responsible for education. i think those kinds of programs are great ideas within the context of your own state.

in the state of california, like wyoming, it has state lands that were set aside specifically to help fund the public schools. so i would encourage you to see your equivalent of the state board of land commissioners to find out if there is a way that your idea could be implemented in california using the state lands set aside specifically for the funding of public schools. host: maxine from california, democrats, you're on with the commerce one did. caller: people have got to come to the realization that a lot of the jobs are not coming back due to technology, and it will be important for parents, teachers, and the government to ensure that our children are educated to be more marketable on regulation -- graduation. as far as spending -- if a

person has a leak in their home and its bigger, this means that by the time the problem is bigger -- had a fix did when it was small, they would have had to spend less. i feel the president inherited -- he had to spend more with what the country was experiencing. host: congresswoman, what about that argument? guest: the caller is right. the president inherited debt and deficits from the republicans who preceded cantor the problem is he made the situation much worse. so now that both parties have failed at the tax and spend or borrow and spend models, we need to try something new. that is why i support paul ryan's road map as a way to try something different, which is to

get a handle on spending that economists say we need, not abrupt spending cuts but a soft glide into a balanced budget. that is what paul ryan's roadmap provides. host: how many years out to the spending cuts begin? what is an adequate time frame? guest: the spending cuts should begin now, and we voted to take our budget totals back to 2008 levels. i think we need to show the american people that we're serious about cutting spending and that we are beginning the process to do that immediately. but we have to do it gradually over time. that is what the road map provides, and you can look at paul ryan's road map at www. americanroadmap.org.

it allows for a road -- a robust economy, and we often hear, why can we have the benefits congress has backed that is exactly what paul brian's plan is modeled after. it will take fifth -- paul ryan's plan is modeled after. it will literally take 50 years from now under his plan to get to the point where we have a totally balanced budget and our debt and deficit are gone. that is a very, very moderate glide path. it protects the social and safety net that he talked about last night and still allows for innovation in a robust economy. it is very opportunity oriented within the private sector. let entrepreneurs do what they do best. host: on the proposal that you and your colleagues put forth on bringing back spending levels to

2008, mark zambia's quoted in "the washington post" this morning, and he said that because of the magnitude that republicans are discussing problem you would not cause a new recession, but there is fragile risk on the new economy. guest: i disagree with that for a couple of reasons. in december we compromised with president obama to extend unemployment benefits at the same time that we kept our taxes at existing levels. had we allowed our taxes to go up on january 1, that is what would have pressed us into the possibility of double-digit unemployment and another recession type of economic conditions. so i am convinced that we did the right thing in december in

crafting that compromise with president obama. now we can go on and do some spending cuts that began to get us on that glide path and prove to the american people and to the financial markets around the world that america is serious about getting its fiscal house in order so that we do not go the direction of greece and ireland and the united kingdom. host: let's hear from ronnie, a republican in new york. caller: ma'am, what i wanted to know is why you put so many people out of work. he decimated california, decimated the gulf coast with the oil. he put more people out of work than at any other president i ever heard of. host: ronnie, "the new york times" says this this morning.

congresswoman, your thoughts? guest: we do know we are exporting jobs to other countries. we do know that we subsidize things like alternative energy, sometimes the benefits go to places like china, where they are building some of the wind turbines that then come back and are used here. so we have to be careful when we set about taking big government in washington can solve these problems when indeed we just need to unleash the private- sector, provide opportunities on a level playing field, not picking winners and losers in washington but allowing businesses to grow and succeed in their communities. and then work with governors in the states to make sure that the states are healthy enough economically to create a climate of entrepreneurialism.

one way we can do that is work with governors to reform that case. i know from my own home and stayed at their own study provides, it is 2.5 times less expensive to provide every child a standard insurance policy than have them on medicaid. with those kinds of studies available around the country, we should allow governors the flexibility to take the federal medicaid dollars without the strings attached and innovate and then share their best practices among the states so we can find the best way to deliver health care to low- income families in the most efficient, effective, affordable way for states and for washington. that is how we should be solving problems in this country. host: el dorado, arkansas, an independent. sika we waste so much money --

and it is not that we waste, but would -- caller: we waste so much money. right here in america we are at war at our borders, and the money that we spend just on natural disasters in other countries and war is just ridiculous when that money should be here to improve our country. we need to fix our country first before we can help others out. there is a lot of money spent there. guest: i would tell the caller i understand her frustration. i object to the secretary of state's proposal to hire another 5000 workers at the state department to help globally with these situations. however, i also support americans' generosity around the world to help stabilize situations such as you described. i think it is important because of america's superior

capabilities such as what was expressed last night president obama when he talked about the company who went and helped free the chilean coal miners -- these are acts of generosity that a free people, people who have enjoyed liberty and the benefits of liberty, can share around the world. so i am of the opinion that it is worthwhile for america to do those things. i just do not think we needed to do it with a bloated bureaucracy. host: west florida, kathy on the republican line. good morning. are you there? it would help if i pushed the button. guest: can you hear me? i just wanted to express my opinion about something. i feel the american people -- you can say we are like a business. we hire our congressmen, our senators, our president to do a job for us. now they have frozen all races

on social security, but they gave themselves great raises. where do you understand a business can give more to its employees and it is taking in? the other thing that i am concerned with is i think you should take on the pharmaceutical companies because what we have to pay for prescriptions, even with the plans that we have, is ridiculous. when you hit that don't hold, it is hard for people -- when you hit that don't hold, it is hard for people on a fixed income -- hole,ou hit that do nut it is hard for people on fixed income to afford that. guest: i would encourage you to read paul ryan's american road map. he includes reforms on medicare

that will protect people who are currently on medicare, protect those who are approaching the age where they are eligible for medicare but try to reform systems for those who are younger. we know that medicare part b did provide options to those who participate in medicare part d where they pay portion of it that allows them access to a less-expensive pharmaceuticals, which i think is an important part of medicare part d. so i do not want to repeal medicare part d, i want to make sure we make it better and more efficient. host: you are on the air with congresswoman lummis. caller: you hear about all the government insurance where it will cover everybody, and yet

you have to pay if you have the money or not to keep your insurance. it is not that nobody wants to pay it, it is just they know -- they want to know what the cost of this is going to be. that is the whole deal with it. and another issue is, the jobs. i do not care how many people go to college, everybody is not going to get a college degree and work on a last building somewhere. you have to have manufacturing jobs. you cannot compete without manufacturing jobs, and you have to keep those jobs here in america. guest: i agree with the caller. one of the things i did not hear president obama last night is the importance of vocational and technical training. in my state, for example, those are very important components of our economy. we have a mineral extraction

economy, and programs even at our community colleges that help train people to go out in the oil and gas fields who work in the coal mines, who have been enormously successful. heavy equipment driving in schools have been extremely successful. those are parts of our economy that we also need to pay attention to. i think states do that best at the state level. but i would encourage the president to look at those types of needs in order to keep a strong, robust, capable manufacturing phase in our country. guest: here is a tweet -- going forward for house republicans as you put forth your own budget, will it contain

-- would have transparency and will it contain everything on the books, including the wars in afghanistan and iraq? guest: we do intend to have those on the books. we do intend to have a more transparent process. we do intend, unlike the last two years, to have what is called an open rule or a modified open rule where we bring our budget bills and appropriations bills to the floor of the house. that will mean every member, regardless of party or seniority, will have a chance to amend that budget. it is a messy process but it is exactly what we were attracted to do. that is a constitutional obligation of the congress to appropriate that money. you will see a lengthy, and nancy debates with those get to the floor of the house. your member of congress will have an opportunity -- you'll messy debates with

those to get to the floor of the house. caller: when you hear them say that they want to bring back the budget to 2008 levels, my confusion is, do they want to bring it back to where the wars were not included on the budgets, or do they want to bring it back to the actual true budget were the wars are included in the budget? guest: thank you, caller. i believe the war was included in the budget in 2008. i will have to go back and check to make sure i am not misrepresenting what the facts were that, but i think it was included in 2008. host: let's go to johnson county, kansas. janice, the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i wanted to know with the mortgage crisis, subprime loans, the mortgage industry was not mentioned in the speech or

the last election by any of the people running for office. i wanted to know why no one is looking into this american home service in texas which has brought up a lot of the subprime cnutter'sd james mack anot company. the national title company on the new york stock exchange controls companies like nation title, chicago title, and has been involved in a lot of the is subprime loans. also i wanted to find out why a lot of these key congress people for years, based on some of the chat rooms, have been allegedly helping these people continue this all the way from 1980 up until the present, were even

some of these key officials' homes are financed by this mr. nutter. host: we will leave in there. that was denise, from johnson county, kansas, a republican. do you have any reaction to that? guest: i do. among the things that you are going to see and that john boehner has ordered committees to do is to have more detailed, frequent, robust oversight hearings. that will come from the committee on oversight and reform, and from oversight committees and from the appropriations committee. if you watch c-span, you will see more hearings that provide oversight in the next two years, asking questions about things, just as the caller described, because that is going to be an important component of john

boehner's agenda for the next two years. host: susan, democratic line, welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. the republicans talked out of both sides of their mouths. they want to put people out of work. duh. you were talking about medicaid. this health insurance law will put more children into insurance. you know, you all need to start, instead of tearing everything down, you need to start with tax reform, go to the bottom and start. you need to start with lowering your own salaries. you need to get money out of lobbying. that is criminal. you need to go into campaign finance reform.

you know, so many things, like here in texas. host: let's get a response from the commerce woman on your ideas. guest:, we are voting to defund presidential elections through federal dollars. that is occurring right now. we are also working to make sure that oversight hearings keep us looking at things like lobbying and what is done inappropriately. i agree with the caller that we should reform the tax code, and i was pleased that the president's and congress are both looking in the direction of what they call closing loopholes, adding hopefully a flat tax, and you might look at paul ryan's plan because it provides the option of either paying your taxes on a flat rate based on all of your income, with no deductions, or

paying taxes the way we do now. so that would provide people with an option. there are areas where we disagree, but there are a small number of areas where we do agree, and that is where we should focus our attention. the caller is right. politicians speak out of both sides of their mouths. it is true democrats, it is true of republicans. so i think the caller for keeping us on a spirit host: one last call for the congresswoman. terry, a republican from texas. caller: one of the things i would like to bring up, everybody is discussing the insurance industry as a whole. back in 1991, i purchased a small insurance agency. i noticed that there was a lot of inequity within the prices people were paying for their

insurance. so what i did was, i was a controller for a company. i went to the secretary of state insurance commissioner and i collected data on their paid claims for a 10-year period. the highest year of paid claims, 14.7%. nobody has ever brought that up one time about their exemptions from the antitrust, and you all allow them -- i do not know the best choice of words, but to do exactly what they wanted to do. the thing about it is there are so many tax loopholes for them to move their money around, that they -- there is something totally wrong with you all defending the insurance industry because it is making a ton of money.

it has a ton of reserve offshore, and you all are sitting there sending those people -- host: lets get a response. guest: i voted last year to repeal the antitrust insurance -- to repeal the antitrust and insurance companies. i would encourage the caller to get on the phone and call your member of congress. make sure we vote to repeal the anti-trust exemption for health insurance companies and that we continue through aggressive oversight to try to ferret out those areas where insurance companies are gouging consumers. i thank the caller for his opinion. host: representative lummis, republican from wyoming, thank you for calltalking to our views this one. guest: thank you very much. host: we will continue to talk

to members of congress on capitol hill as well, but first we want to show you a little bit about what the president had to say last night about energy and the strategy for it. >> we can break our dependence on biofuels and have the first electric vehicles on the road by 2050. [applause] we need to get behind this innovation. to help pay for it, i am asking congress to help eliminate the billions of taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. [applause] i do not know if you have noticed, but they are doing just fine on their own. so instead of subsidizing yesterday's energy, let's invest in tomorrow's. clean energy breakthroughs will

only translate into clean energy jobs is businesses know there will be a market for what they're selling. so tonight i challenge you to join me in setting a new goal by 2035, 80% of america plus electricity will come from clean energy sources. [applause] some folks want wind and solar, others want to clear, clean coal and natural gas. to meet this goal, we will need them all. i urge democrats and republicans to work together to make it happen. host: on the president possible for energy, the 80% target. here is "the new york times."

host: david, an independent in wisconsin, good morning. the president is coming your way later today. sika yes, he is. it is a miracle out here. host: are you going to go? caller: it is pretty tough to get over there. host: what do you want to hear? caller: you have had various callers talked about not only jobs but the income of certain people like our elected officials who keep somehow giving themselves raises. as the national average, the

national people who are going under increases. wages, jobs are getting lost. there are eight. million jobs created, but they did not talk -- there are $8.1 million credit, but they do not talk about the jobs going overseas to mexico and things like this. in addition, they are not addressing the fact that most people on unemployment have exhausted not only their regular unemployment but their opportunity for extensions. those people are not included in the unemployment rolls. the unemployment in this country is probably well up towards 15%, but people just do not want to hear that because they are off the rolls, and they're looking at things the wrong way and they do not address the issues that really need to be addressed.

they are talking about things overseas, which is great, but we need to bring some of the money that we give -- a caller earlier mentioned our kindness and generosity to other countries in times of national crisis or national disasters. that is for the common american to stand up and go, hey, yeah, i'm going to give and help these people out over here. that is not for our federal government to say we will give $50 million here, $20 million there, because they're giving tax host: joining us from capitol hill this morning is debbie wasserman schultz, democrat of florida, and one of chief deputy minority whips for the democrats. i do not know if you were able to hear that caller, but he was

talking about those that are unemployed. from what you heard last night in the state of the union address, what can specifically create jobs for the unemployed? guest: i think there are a lot of things that a person concerned about job creation could look to in president obama's address last night. the challenge to the congress to make sure by 2025, 85% of america can have access to high- speed rail. that is ripe for a job opportunities. extending 98% of americans to high-speed internet. the energy challenge he laid out so that we can make sure america can continue to out-compete and out-educate. that would be the sputnik moment for our generation. we also need to look at where we

have been and how far we've come. we have gone from bleeding 750,000 a month to adding over 1 million private sector jobs in the last year. for people who are currently unemployed, that number is not that helpful. president obama laid out the right kind of balance between making sure that we make smart investments that will be focused on creating jobs and focused on keeping america competitive and at the same time, talking about making sure we close special- interest loopholes so that we can keep america competitive on the global stage economically and in job creation through allowing businesses to be able to make investments. host: i want to go back to our caller, david on the line for independents.

he is calling from wisconsin. what is your reaction to what the congresswoman said, david? caller: i appreciate what she said. i was not able to listen to the whole speech last night. i know that president obama is trying to look at things and that the democrats, as well, are trying to look at things in a positive matter -- positive manner. both of these parties spend too much time analyzing each other's opinions and decisions and not realizing that they are, as a caller said earlier, they are hired by us. host: congresswoman? guest: as democrats, we are focused on job creation, turning

the economy around, putting people back to work, and making sure we make america competitive through innovation and technology. that is the yardstick that we are going to measure republican proposals. last night was a good step toward bipartisanship. it may seem just symbolic, but even the fact that we sat together in the chamber -- it changed the dynamic of the way we listened to the speech. i thought it made it more mature. president obama, i thought, delivered the most bipartisan state of the union address that i have ever heard. not only did he reach out to both sides of the aisle, but all ends of the spectrum. there was something meaningful that democrats and republicans and independents could all

latched onto in his address. it spoke to america as a team. it spoke to americans as being all in this together. host: who did you sit next to? guest: i sat next to my colleague from florida and a colleague from texas. host: what will you continue to do? guest: i have always reached across the aisle to members that i can try to find common ground with. we also sat with the congressional women's softball team, which is already bipartisan. i have been able to work with my colleague on internet safety and issues important to children and making sure this space program can take space exploration to the next level.

congressman webster was the speaker of the state house and was my speaker when i was in the statehouse. we worked together on helping children who are disadvantaged in the program called hippies. it is a program that insures bestts can be children's teachers. and for parents to be able to help their children succeed. there are a lot of things. you just have to look below the surface. the two people i set next to are very conservative republicans. i'm a liberal democrat. it may seem like there's very little we can agree on. when you try, you find you have a lot more in common. host: we have a republican waiting to talk to you. dan is in north carolina.

caller: i've memorize everything you have said since 2007. every economist on tv has said that if you do not fix housing, the economy cannot get better. the statistics that just came out were 3.8 million people lost their homes and 5 million people are behind on their mortgage. these people do not have credit anymore. they cannot buy a house for the next seven years. how on earth are we going to get rid of this inventory of foreclosed home if we do not put a stop to the foreclosures and let these people stay in their homes? guest: dan, i completely agree with you. you may be aware that i come from a state, florida, which has among the highest foreclosure rates in the country. our economy is not going to rebound in any significant way in my home state unless we get a handle on the housing crisis. i agree with you. i think we need to go further than we have to essentially

force banks to make sure that they worked out mortgages with their mortgagees. i have had so many clashes with banks in my communities who believe these people twisting in the wind. these are people who can actually pay. in order to get any possibility of having a loan worked out, they have to stop paying their mortgage. that is unacceptable. far too many people in america are upside down in their homes and are stuck in their facing a short sale or a foreclosure. it is not acceptable. i think we need to go much further. i agree with you. host: on the issue of fiscal restraint -- here is "usa today" editorial. i understand you have been appointed to the budget

committee. how will democrats lead on this issue of the debt? when would be the right time to put forward a strategy to tackle the entitlement program? guest: president obama talked about his initiatives last night and challenged congress to freeze domestic spending for five years. it would cut money from the deficit. we have gone in the wrong direction on the house side with republicans moving to repeal the health care reform legislation, which would add to the deficit. we need to make sure we are focused on deficit reduction. we have taken significant steps towards doing that legislatively. we hope the republicans are willing to have their actions back up their words. host: where do you see a common ground between democrats and republicans on spending cuts? guest: we need to sit down and

hammer out the common ground. for example, we could take a look at the farm program. i think the farm program is one place that many democrats and republicans think there is a lot of bloat. let's take a look at the teen abstinence program. we spend tens of millions of dollars on these programs. every study has shown that they do not work they do not promote abstinence. in fact, the opposite occurs. you have more pregnancies occur because we are only focusing on abstinence and not making sure we get the needed first control and assistance -- i'm not talking about abortion. i'm talking about educating young women to use contraception. those are two areas where a significant amount of money is being spent. we need to take a look at that.

the wars in iraq and afghanistan. we are spending billions of dollars on those wars. the iraq war was a war of choice. the war in afghanistan is one of the american people are wary of. those are three areas that democrats and republicans can come together on. host: joe is an independent in missouri. guest: you're talking about jobs -- caller: you're talking about jobs. my father worked in the camps. we have approximately 14 million americans out of work. let's stop some of these programs like you did back them. you do not have to call them ccc. all these people are unemployed.

we are paying them unemployment payments. they're not doing anything. say that billions of dollars we are paying in unemployment and put these people to work in building the infrastructure, the buildings, the rose, and our electrical grid. we're 50 years behind. our roads and bridges are falling apart. put them to work. you can do that almost immediately. put them on these unused military bases. host: congresswoman, "the new york times" on the issue of infrastructure said -- "finding the money for the nation to update its aging infrastructure will not be easy." guest: it will not be easy, but it is absolutely critical.

i agree with the sentiment of the caller that making sure we get people to work through infrastructure investment gives us a two-for. the civilian conservation corps to from the new deal essentially had government funds paying individuals to build our nation's infrastructure. the 21st century version of that is to make sure we can make an investment in our nation's infrastructure in the private sector and put people back to work in the private sector to build up our nation's infrastructure. we can do that through tax incentives, tax breaks, and making sound and smart investments. we have to strike the right balance. i do not think creating a separate government program to do that is the right decision for the 21st century. host: "the new york times" editorial this morning on the

president's state of the union says "the president did not call for raising other taxes." would it include raising taxes? guest: president obama laid out a significant step to adding to our deficit reduction efforts. he proposed the five-year freeze. that reduces the deficit by another $400 billion. we have a number of other initiatives. before we start talking about anything like a tax increase, we have to make sure that we close the tax loopholes that special interests are getting three we have to make sure we stop losing jobs to overseas.

american companies are in some device to create jobs out of country. we have a credibility gap that we have to close first, particularly on spending, as well as the right combination of tax breaks. host: congresswoman debbie wasserman schultz, thank you very much. guest: thank you very much. host: we have about 45 minutes left in today's "washington journal." coming up next, we'll talk to a new republican member, frank guinta, a republican of new hampshire. first, on education -- a lot of that was mentioned today from our callers. here is "the new york times" on that. "china requires nine years of education and india just eight.

laws vary by state. rules in the united states are mostly tougher." many of the papers had this this morning. "the washington post" had this headline on education. "u.s. students falling short in science." -- "theverag average student was stumped when asked to examine a temperature graf or explain an example of heat transfer." roseburg, ore.. bill is a republican. what did you think of last night's state of the union? caller: i enjoyed it. it was interesting to read what

i thought was interesting -- it was interesting. i heard a caller say that the federal government got paid more. if my wife had not been at the v.a. hospital for as long as she had, -- i have been on social security. i have some money in my stocks. i have two kids in college. they graduated from high school in the top 10% of their classes. we got loans at 8.5% interest. if they keep cutting my wife's income, i do not know what we're going to do. my wife has a degree. because she happens to have a job, we get no grants or any help at all. you hear people talking about low interest loans for students.

8.5% is what we pay for our kids to go to college. i think it is wrong. i have known people who have a low in come -- income or a foreign name that gets full scholarships and my kids cannot get any help at all. host: we will leave it there. frank guinta is a republican of new hampshire. he defeated the former democrat rep. thank you for talking to our viewers this morning. let's begin with the front page of "the baltimore sun." "the president proposes a five- year spending freeze." what do you think? guest: i commend the president

on a good, effective speech. he talked about unity and working together. he mentioned a few things that i think conservatives and people in the country that were watching closely in november's election and last evening were probably satisfied with. things like stopping the -- having the freeze for the five years on spending is a first good step. he stated that he will veto any earmarks in any legislation that comes to his desk. that's a good second step. i think he needs to go much farther. we'll have to wait and see what his budget proposal includes. host: when you say much further, are you talking about tackling entitlement programs? do you endorse paul ryan, the republican chairman of the budget committee and his road map for america? guest: on the freeze on spending for five years, the reality is that spending just went up

about 20% during we have to reduce it, at a minimum, back to 2008 levels. we have to look at potentially moving it back for their -- back farther. you are absolutely correct. everything has to be on the table, including entitlements. what the country stated in november -- work cooperatively and effectively and make the tough decisions on some of the longer term, non discretionary items that we have. that includes medicaid, medicare, and social security. host: do you support the road map for america? guest: i support the concept. there are probably things that i would like to change. paul ryan has put together a very effective blueprint for the country. i look forward to working with people like paul ryan and others from the other side of the aisle who want to focus on substance and policy, rather than rhetoric

and campaign promises. host: cynthia lummis talked about the road map for america and said it would take 50 years to come to a balanced budget. here is a viewer who e-mailed in. guest: well, what paul ryan has put together is a long-term strategy for the long-term viability of the country. that is not to suggest that we do not have immediate challenge to effectuate. we absolutely do. part of the process is that we have to hear from the president and his budget proposal. the house will take a look at that and craft its own changes or modifications. it will present its budget. that will serve as the blueprint for us in terms of appropriations and how spending

will continue for this fiscal year and fiscal years beyond. i think the best and most effective thing for every member of congress to do is to not look at each other as a party label, but look at each other as colleagues and try to find common ground in the immediate challenges. when you have a $1.5 trillion deficit in the existing budget and you have the white house stating, as they did this past summer, that the next three budgets will be equal or higher than that deficit -- that the problem that most americans agree have to be solved. i will work with any member of congress who wants to focus on those issues. i think it would be good for the country. host: who did you sit next to last night? what is your plan to continue bipartisan discussion? guest: it was my first state of the union. my wife came with me. it was a great honor to listen

to the president and to be there representing new hampshire. i found an aisle seat, but not on the isle the president walked in on. i sat next to steve kaine and the congressman from massachusetts. i have not met him yet. we had a great conversation. we talked about some things that we would like to work on together. i think the notion of us all sitting together is a good thing for the country. the real work begins today in our committees, talking to other members from the opposite party on identifying the areas where we can agree. we are not going to agree on everything. we know that. that's the beauty of our country. we have different perspectives and different ideas that we can always bring to the table. i think there's opportunity here and room for a bipartisan approach to the challenges that we face as a nation.

host: the house oversight and government reform committee starts its work today. you sit on that committee. the committee will hear about the t.a.r.p. program and hear from barofsky, the special inspector general for the program. what do you plan to ask? guest: i have to get off to that meeting very shortly. my goal is -- not just that issue, but any issue that comes before the committee -- to talk about how taxpayer dollars have been spent. what are the goals? is there a metric that we are determining how effective the program is? if the program is effective, can it be improved? if it is not affected, can it be improved or should it be discarded? that would be my general theme

for any subject matter in which taxpayer dollars are spent. host: we will have live coverage at that hearing beginning at 9:30 a.m. eastern time on c- span3. caller, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to ask representative guinta a question. my question was really for cynthia lummis. several other people had called in regarding health care cost and the doughnut hole. they were asking questions about prescription costs for senior citizens and the total amount of the premiums that paid into the insurance companies and what not. i just wonder why she did not explain to them that the health care bill -- there are some

guidelines in it that 80% to 85% of the money that is taken in in the new health care bill that everyone called obamacare -- that would make sure that the 14% of what he paid toward -- people's health. guest: i did not seem congresswoman lummis' answer to the question. i can say this. there was a moment last evening in a speech when the president said that there's a rumor going around at some of you may have a problem with the health care act. it was a light moment. everybody proceeded to laugh. he said he was willing to work with everyone who disagreed with the policy in trying to find

better substitutes and changes. i think that demonstrates the recognition that there are problems with this piece of legislation. i personally feel that it's unconstitutional. that is a very important issue to every member of congress. moving beyond that, we have got to find true ways to reduce the cost of health insurance. that has got to be the number one issue for people across this country. for my state of new hampshire, i continue to meet business owners and small business owners who say, "we want health care reform. the challenge that i have is a business owner is that we do not have the funds to continue to pay for health insurance. this legislation has not aided us in reducing the cost." i was just talking to a gentleman who owns a company in new hampshire who continues to ask, "can i legally buy

insurance across state lines, like i could for homeowners insurance or life insurance?" he has an actual policy from arizona that would save him about $200 per month per employee. that is very important for a state like new hampshire. we are a small business state. 75% of our economy relies on small business. i would also like to protect the consumer and ensure that the consumer has a reduction in cost. we have not seen that as a result of this legislation. i would like to work with the new congress. i would like the senate to take a vote on the bill. if they do not, we will get to work right away on try to find areas of common ground. the president identified a loophole as one common ground. he talked about toward reform last night for the first time. those are things the republican has -- those are things the republicans have talked about.

i'm glad to see that the president wants to meet us in those areas. host: peggy in annapolis, an independent scholar, -- an independent caller, go ahead. caller: i admire and respect congresswoman wasserman schultz. i really respect and admire her. she is a wonderful role model. she represents the people of florida, not because of the money, but because her -- because she is a really committed public servant. i also know that she is a breast cancer survivor. i really disappointed that i mr. -- that i missed her. host: thank you. you were a mayor of manchester. the cuts that are put forward by

colleagues, what kind of impact could that have on cities like manchester? are you concerned at all the impact that could have on cities like manchester? guest: first, let me tell peggy that i will convey her comments to debbie. i had a chance to meet her. she's a great woman. i look forward to working with her regarding cuts on the federal level, i think most people understand we have a job to do. we have a $1.5 trillion deficit for this budget and future budgets. we have a $14 trillion debt that has to be dealt with. it is not sustainable. i do most people agree with that. i spoke with our democratic governor, john lynch from new hampshire, and said that we have to get to work on some of the

challenges that we have. new hampshire has upwards of a $1 billion deficit for the state. i think what is happening in new hampshire -- most communities are reducing their budget. i read the newspapers from new hampshire every day. i just saw that a town is reducing their budget. you have places that are looking to find efficiencies and ways that hold the line. that is what is happening at local level. i think washington ought to take a page out of the local level but. the reality is that they are tightening their belts. we have to get through this period. it's extremely important for us to have a pro-growth economy, so we can have greater revenues coming in, so we can either spend those dollars or return those dollars to the taxpayers.

washington ought to take a page out of new hampshire's book. host: congressman, we know you have to get to the hearing. thank you for talking to our viewers. we will continue to take your phone calls on the "washington journal." your reaction to the state of the union. here's a little bit about what the president had to say on tax cuts. >> we measure process by the success of our people, the jobs they can find, and the quality of life they can offer. the prospect of a small business owner who dreams of turning a good idea into a thriving enterprise. by the opportunities for better life that we pass on to our children. that's the project the american people want us to work on. together. [applause]

we did that in december. thanks to the tax cuts we passed, americans' paychecks are a little bigger today. every business can write off the full cost of new investments that they make this year. these steps, taken by democrats and republicans, will grow the economy and add to the more than 1 million private sector jobs created last year. we have to do more. the steps we have taken over the last two years may have broken the back of this recession, but to win the future, we will need to take on challenges that have been decades in the making. host: we will go back to your phone calls in just a minute. first, an e-mail. this viewer says the real state of the union speech was given by paul ryan. here is a little from the budget chairman on his plans for tackling the deficit.

>> are forthcoming budget is our obligation to show you how we will do things differently and how we will cut spending to get the debt down. if we act soon and if we act responsibly, people in and near respect -- near retirement will be protected. host: gary on the independent line, what is your reaction? caller: is aimed more at uniting the parties. i'm sick of that. jackson, you know, he had less education than his opponents, but he had courage and integrity. was aroosevelt' republican. he had courage and integrity.

he stood up against his own party. he stood up for america. his cousin, franklin roosevelt, he had some courage. i remember all of the psycho talk that went on in the era of his cousin. he was accused of being a communist. it just went on and on. host: steve in illinois e-mails this. west newton, pa.. ed on the line for democrats. i'm going to put you on hold for you have to turn down the television. i will go to george. caller: i have been studying this problem we have as far as

jobs quite extensively. i worked for ge and another company in the area. at the time, they moved to mexico and overseas. if we are going to stay competitive on the world market, we need cheap, clean energy. in order to get investments, we need a way to transport that energy to the market. wind farms are normally set in rural areas. the high-speed rail system, the conductors for this system can double for our grid system as far as transporting it to market. the jobs -- it would put jobs in at the front end. at the same time, with cheap energy, it will bring jobs in at the back end. i hope they're looking at putting money into this system.

in a modern society, we need high-speed transportation to get people to work and an educated labor force. >> within 25 years, our goal is to give 80% of americans access to high-speed rail. [applause] this could allow you to go places in half the time it takes to travel by car. for some trips, it will be faster than flying -- without the pat-down. [laughter] [applause] as we speak, routes in california and the midwest are already underway. within the next five years, we will make it possible for businesses to deploy the next generation of high-speed wireless coverage to 98% of all

americans. this is not just about a faster internet or fewer dropped calls. it's about connecting every part of america to the digital age. host: ed, a democrat, you are on the air. caller: i feel the democrats and republicans parties are not good for the united states. they're more interested in representing their political parties than their constituents. host: winston-salem, dave, an independent scholar -- independent caller. good morning. caller: good morning. i have three points. the president is saying that freezing spending -- if i froze

what i made for the last five years, i would be bankrupt in 12 months. they need to make serious cuts. i keep hearing politicians talk about stopping programs that do not work. i'm very concerned about the department of energy, which was started with jimmy carter. oil. using 22% of foreign i think that would be the first place to cut. eliminate that program. if my job was to do something and i did three times worse than what my projection was, i would certainly be fired. i also have a concern about subsidizing everything with the federal government. we subsidize oil and we turn around and we subsidize ethanol. we subsidize solar and wind. if we let the free markets do what they need to do and let people buy what is best for

them, i think our country would save a lot of money. i think people would be happier and healthier. host: dave, in "the washington post" this morning -- he makes the argument, "it is likely to come from additional private investments spurred by increased confidence confidence -- increased confidence. it will focus on demonstrable financial returns. toll roads, wind farms, air- traffic control systems would compete for funding on the basis of their ability to generate user fees to repay the bank's bondholders.

-- bondholders." that is in "the washington post" this morning. caller: i do have a problem with toll roads. the government is supposed to provide interstate transportation and interstate commerce. from my limited understanding of the government, they are supposed to protect our borders, general welfare. we pay a gas tax and yet we are supposed to pay toll rose after that -- toll roads after that. denver post"is "the this morning.

richmond, virginia. landon on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. i have listened to everything everyone has to say. i think everyone is correct about everything. i am here on the ground level. i'm here working and trying to help people out. i enjoyed to the president's speech. i was greatly inspired. i think everyone is so happy that he is such a good man. we still forget about that tv commercial -- the 800 pound guerrilla in the room. one, you have to pay taxes. we have people in the united states from canada and mexico.

talk about the canadians who come here and other people who come to the united states. this is the place where you make the money. they would not come here if you could not make the money. that is the 800-pound gorilla in the room. if every american had a job -- every american cannot be a computer analysis. if every american had a job, we would have zero unemployment in the united states of america. host: president obama did talk about illegal immigration. here is what he had to say. >> i think we should take on once and for all the issue of illegal immigration. i am prepared to work with

republicans and democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws, and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows. [applause] [applause] i know that debate will be difficult. i know it will take time. tonight, let's agree to make that effort. let's stop expelling talented, responsible young people, who could be staffing our research labs, starting a new business, or further enriching this nation. host: george, democratic line. your reaction to the state of the union? good morning. caller: i'm greatly appreciative that the president wants to get jobs to the area. the main concern is -- what about the people who exhausted

their unemployment benefits that are not getting help? they are homeless and they cannot afford food or anything. i understand it will take a while to get jobs. what about helping us people who exhausted unemployment benefits? host: "orange county register" frontpage -- good morning, caller. caller: good morning. i want to know why they forgot all about the widows. i'm a widow. my husband died a year-and-a- half ago. they cut my social security 50%. i have multiple sclerosis. i am well over 65. i have got a mortgage and i have -- and i take medication that

costs a lot of money. host: what did you want to hear from the president? caller: i want to hear what he is going to do for the senior citizens that cannot work or who are disabled. this is the second year. we have 115 million widows who are starving. i just happen to be one of them. host: "the miami herald" front page -- "obama puts his money on the economy." jim on the line for independents. go ahead. response to ryan's the president upsets me. basically, that we're not going to cut benefits for the widows and orphans that we currently

have, but future widows and orphans will have to get by with less. i'm not pleased he mentioned that commission report. i do not believe people should have to work past 65. if you are bouncing around a truck all day or digging in a coal mine, when you are 65, you are 65. i do not care if people live to be 500. these are my thoughts on this. they need to stand up for the american people and not just for the rich. host: "the hartford current" does not have a headline or a picture, but does have a side story, "obama calls for a new home." los angeles, adjacent on the line for democrats. caller: we are being talked about the health care for the past two years.

i'm kind of sad republicans are bringing that up again. -- they keep -- we need to buy health care across state lines. it is already in there. the republicans are also saying that the premiums are out of control right now. in 2014, the insurance company can only raise the insurance 10%. if they raise it more than 10%, they have to get permission from the government. all that stuff is already in it. they want to repeal it, instead of amending it. if anything is wrong with the bill, you can amend it. host: conrad, a republican, you our next. go ahead.

caller: i sit there and watch all the democrats and republicans. you have guys who graduated from harvard and penn state. they can send people to the moon and they cannot even get us out of a jam. they put us in it. if they cannot get it together and put some normal, blue-collar people in there and i bet they can figure it out in one week to get us out of this mess. they can send us to the moon and do things that other countries cannot do. they led us into this and they should be able to get us out of this. if they cannot get us out this -- out of this in 90 days, they should talk to blue-collar workers. host: paul ryan gave the gop response last night. he is also the chairman of the budget committee. he had this to say. >> one of our first acts in the

new majority, house republicans cut our own budget. the house voted to restore the spending discipline that washington needs. host: jane, an independent. welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. it seems like after the first of the year, the plight of the unemployed has gone completely ignored. there are still millions and millions of people who cannot find a job. we need a permanent extension of unemployment insurance until the national average gets at least below 7%. this 30-day and extension is not getting it. we need help. we are dying out here. host: let's go to south carolina.

a caller on the democratic line. you are next. caller: hi. they are not talking about a lot of spending. a lot of spending is coming from housing and section eight. they have not talked about that at all. people are living off of other people and getting food stamps. my family cannot even get it and we are not making that much money to provide for our family. why are they not talking about that? they are not talking about that type of spending. these young girls are sitting here and having more babies. host: another topic that was not mentioned in a lot of the papers was afghanistan and iraq. here's what the president had to say. >> this july, we will begin to bring our troops home.

[applause] in pakistan, al-qaeda's leadership is under more pressure than at any time since 2001. their leaders and operatives are being removed from the battlefield. they're safe havens are shrinking. we sent a message from the afghan border to the arabian peninsula to all parts of the globe. we will not relent. we will not waver. we will defeat you. host: don, an independent in kansas city, kansas. go ahead. caller: i have been listening to this and it has been driving me nuts. the one woman called in about unemployment and in needing to be a permanent extension -- that makes sense. people would have money to spend. the american people need to go

to economics 101. go back to grade school and get this. they keep talking about cutting government employees' salaries. if you take away the buying power from anybody -- these are your neighbors. if you take that away, you've taken away part of the economy. you don't need a bunch of people cannot buy anything. they just do not have anything to spend. the thing they need to do, if they're going to do anything at all, to start with, they need to quit financing sending jobs overseas. they keep giving tax breaks to shut down corporations. they tear down the building so they can take the jobs to

another country. host: "the washington post" know that in addition to talking about afghanistan, the president announced plans to make his first ever trip to south america. san francisco, robert on the line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. host: what is your comment? caller: i'm calling to let you know that i'm running for president. [inaudible] i am planning on cutting government by 1/3. in order to do that, say that you have to cut 40,000 people out of one department. i cut 30,000 people. i cut from the top down. and then about 10% from the bottom of to the middle. host: here is "the wall street

journal" on the tax cuts. "in the state of the union, mr. obama said he wanted to lower the tax rate now without adding to the deficit. that would mean offsetting any cut in the overall rate by ending many broad tax deductions. the impact of which would be distributed unevenly across corporate america. the president did not offer specifics. in november, a white house appointed commission recommending lowering the corporate rate by 7% -- by seven percentage points to 28%." bedford, indiana. john on the line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to put this in perspective. the republicans thought it was a huge fight to get tax cuts for the rich. then they wanted to waste time

with the health care law, which they know they will not get. the president will veto that. shortly thereafter, some of the first cuts, along with fbi agents, correctional officers, it is almost a half a million kids out of headstart. i just want to put that in perspective for the american people. republicans are not in the fight for you if you are not a millionaire. host: in washington today, at 11:30 a.m. eastern time at the heritage foundation, we will have live coverage of rep cantor. that will be on c-span3. also, the house oversight committee is taking a look at the t.a.r.p. program. as we mentioned earlier, cbo will come out with this outlook for 2011 around 11:00 a.m.

eastern time today. president obama travels to wisconsin this afternoon to talk more about what he said in the state of the union address last night on jobs. wayne on the line for independents. good morning. caller: my concern is that the president sounded like he wanted to have amnesty for all these illegal aliens. they want to put people to work. let's put people to work getting ready -- getting rid of the illegal aliens and putting them across the border and keeping them across the border. there are a lot of jobs that could open up right there. you talk about the t.a.r.p. program. there are two projects going on in my area. when you drive through there, everybody doing the work is hispanic. i just do not see where that

t.a.r.p. is helping the actual american people. we have got to get the illegal aliens out of this country. if we have kids here, they need to go, too. that is benefiting someone who has done something illegal. host: we'll hear from a republican in west virginia. caller: yes, i have a couple things. our economy when down the tubes when we had the free trade agreements. the one with china is the worst of the bunch. it i do not understand why would we -- why we would deal with a communist country. they are buying up this country. in ohio alone, russia owns three steel mills -- they did, if they have not shut them down. i do not mean trying to create

new jobs. rebuild our industry. if we have to go to war with anybody, we could not hold it up. we do not have the steel mills to put out the materials. our shoes are made in india and china. one year and the shoes are shot. they are not quality. if we do not shut down the free trade agreements, this country is going down the tubes. it ought to start with the people in congress. they should get term limits of 12 years max and then no more. host: stephanie, a democrat in south carolina. if you could make it quick -- the house is about to come in for morning business. stephanie, are you with us. stephanie, are you there? go ahead. caller: i hope everyone was listening last night when paul ryan talked about his plans