our roads and railways, and things that will help our economy to grow. that is exactly what we are doing in my honorable friend's constituency, and in many other constituencies across the country. >> the prime minister insists that the financial crisis was caused by a lack of regulation, but even after the collapse of northern rock he complained that the last government had subjected the banks to excessive bureaucracy and too much regulation. he promised to give them an easier ride, saying, "government needs to do less taxing and regulating." is that why donors in the city have given the tory party so much money? >> i remember a time when the honorable gentleman used to write the last prime minister's questions. given what he has said, i think that the last prime minister is writing his questions. the fact is that labour left us the most indebted households, the most bust banks, and a deficit -- >> order. the prime minister's answer will be heard, and with some courtesy. that is what the public want to

see. they are sick to death of this sort of behavior. >> thank you, mr. speaker. let me just make one point. the person who was the city minister when the city blew up is now your shadow chancellor. great pick. >> can the prime minister give an assurance that parliament will have the final say on whether prisoners will have the right to vote? in view of the public's disdain for the unelected bureaucrats in strasbourg, will he defend our country from any further sanctions from europe on the issue? >> i think the honorable lady knows that i have every sympathy with her view. i see no reason why prisoners should have the vote. this is not a situation that i want this country to be in. i am sure that you will all have a very lively debate on thursday, when the house of commons will make its views known. >> each week the house of

commons is in session, we air prime minister's questions. you can find a video archive of past programs and links to the house of commons and the prime minister's website at c- span.org. >> tomorrow the president's fiscal year 2012 budget will be released. we will bring you live coverage from a baltimore school where president obama talks about the budget and education. we will also have reaction from the pentagon, the white house budget office, and members of congress. on tuesday, the house is expected to start debate on a bill that proposes a broad reductions in fiscal year 2011 spending levels possible vote later in the week. live health coverage on c-span. tomorrow on c-span3, a hearing

on public employee pensions and state financial problems. our live coverage starts at 4:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> we are focused with the threat is. our goal is to protect whatever consumers or employees use. >> monday, cyber security on the communicator's on c-span2. >> not a look at the week ahead for the president and congress. this is just under an hour. "washington journal" continues. host: our sunday round table, welcome back. let's begin with c-pac conference which wrapped up yesterday. coming in first in the non-

binding straw poll again this year, texas commerce ron paul getting 30%. what do you read into those numbers? guest: ron paul has proved to be pretty popular. this group -- the tracks college students and their behind the libertarian message. if you combine the ron paul and gary johnson numbers, you get more than 1/3. that is the great libertarian side of the party. i think you will see some very interesting shaking of the party from that side. the 2008 democratic presidential field, if you look at them, the top three candidates, edwards,

clinton, obama, they were running a campaign closer to the dennis kucinich 2004 campaign. whoever wins the republican nomination in 2012 will be running something closer to the ron paul 2008 campaign. that is some of the direction the party is going host: rounding out the list are three or four individuals who are likely to run for president including newt gingrich, tim pawlenti, minn. congresswoman michelle bachmann, and mitch daniels, the current governor of indiana. guest: these are individuals will been organizing and getting ready for an actual presidential campaign or some of them have been more of a tease. mitch daniels, this does not show a groundswell of support

but it shows they have a launching pad there is a little bit of support for them and will have a ways to go if they want to get out rate -- name recognition. host: a cover story from the national review -- the front page story of the miami herald is -- he has no intent to run. guest: that is an interesting story. i have not heard the begging in washington from the conservative side of washington. i have heard some folks saying wooded -- wouldn't it be interesting if --. he has been fairly solid about

not running. the bush fenty is a very real factor out there. -- the bush petite is a very real factor out there. -- a the bushfatigue is a very real factor i can't imagine that the boy fatigue has gone away enough. host: george bush sold about 2 million copies. guest: and a former president will attract a certain amount of attention. it is not a typical memoir. he is open about some of his decisions and willingness to stir up controversy. that will probably have some residual of fact. we can only take a jeb bush at his word. there is no indication he is building up an organization or that he has folks in iowa, new hampshire or anything of that nature. it looks like he is not running. host: we will talk about the

situation in egypt and the budget outlined by the white house tomorrow. we want to focus on c-pac. ron paul came in first and he is a former libertarian presidential candidate. this is part of what he had to separate >> i am glad to see the revolution is continuing. we have seen some of the results of the revolution of a few years ago and that was last year's election. we have a few new members in congress. we have you to thank for it. i want to take a moment to take a special privilege and say that we also had a new senator from kentucky and we like that, too. there is a lot of exciting things going on.

there is truly a revolution going on in this country. we have been dealing with this and encouraging it. i believe we live in a time where we do need a change in attitude, a change in ideas buried we don't need to just change the political party, we need to change our philosophy about what this country is all about. host: what ron paul so popular among conservatives? guest: this message of the government borrowing to bay ,ron paul has squatted on that message since he ran back in 2008. you now have much of the rest of the party and the tea party energy is very much behind that message. he has been there were the rest of that republican party is going. he may be further than the rest of the party at this point. he may be either in front or in a different place than them, but

they are moving in that direction. we could go through all the issues. he may be more extreme on the federal reserve and the gold standard but the basic of the government needs to live within its means at ron paul rallies in 2007, he would save a were 'constitution' and his fans would go crazy. guest: he has been out front talking about these issues for 30 years in congress. some of his ideas have actually gone sort of mainstream in republican circles he and even among some democrats like auditing the federal reserve or giving scrutiny to their policies of printing more money. i think there is a breakdown with his foreign-policy views.

he is essentially an isolationist. he does not believe in an assertive foreign policy and not of the nature that george w. bush as ballast and john mccain and other leaders of the party. there is in increasing amounts of members of congress who are questioning troop levels in afghanistan and iraq but that is not a majority of the party. if congress paul starts to pick up traction, his foreign-policy views would get more scrutiny. host: you're never senior edit "politico." your also the all of"going dirty." terry is joining us from

pennsylvania, republican lie caller:. my question is for your to reporters. i am watching the events in egypt over the last couple of weeks, the liberal media has been ecstatic over the change in egypt. they said the protesters were unhappy with the government and they were speaking up. the economy and jobs or in the tank. look at how the liberal media treated the protesters in america, the tea party. they painted them as racists or carrying swastikas. they are trying to give obama credit with what is going on in egypt. it is just amazing. the 2012 campaign has started with the media trying to promote obama. host: these are photographs and news from egypt.

you can see a very different situation on this sunday morning midafternoon in cairo. guest: from the u.s. government's standpoint, it will be a tough transition. president obama had some remarks friday afternoon after we got the news that the egyptian president mubarak is stepping the military has to continue some sort of commitment to democracy. there will be a lot of pressure on him to do it with the security side of things, make sure that they do not achieve victory over a sand in the egyptian government. there are not that much leverage he has to pull. we saw the lower level of leverage he has to pull. throughout the first 18 days of

the crisis. host: what egypt can teach america. it is a new day in the arab world. let's hope that the truth is that the u.s. has been behind the curve not only in in the shed and indonesia, but in the entire middle east for decades. we support autocrats as long as they keep oil flowing. guest: this is been the critique from the left in the right that this is something fundamentally wrong with u.s. foreign policy directed toward the arab world. it is supporting these autocratic leaders that do not have popular support. there are a lot of question marks about how to replace them, how they threaten u.s. interests, a lot of geopolitical sense iterations. -- considerations. hillary clinton was there just a few weeks before the egyptian uprising.

she made this point. it is hard to believe in cause and effect but it seems that the administration was how they had this a bit. it was not completely ignored. host: from your vantage point with members of congress keeping a close eye on this and the money part of it, the $1.5 billion that the united states provides egypt, what business? >> that is the only major lever that the u.s. can pull, to stop it or let it continue as a report -- as a reward. it is the sentiment that the u.s. -- even though foreign aid is a miniscule part of the u.s. budget, that sentiment is certainly out there. congress is under the same sort of pressure as the white house, to figure out a way through. host: david mark, the white

house proposals will be out tomorrow. it would barely put a dent in the deficits that congressional budget analysts say could approach $12 trillion through 2021. the policies would stabilize ball rolling, and reverse the trend would put a blunt of the trauma of the recent recession. >> it will not be enough for congressional republicans. they will said the cuts are too small, they do not go far enough, the administration will counter that we have to maintain some of these services. we cannot cut of all in one year. but it is like having a huge credit card bill and paying down 20% of that, at least making again. it remains to be seen how much will get through congress. the budget the president proposes is just that -- a proposal, only a beginning. we are in for a long fight in going forward on these budget issues.

guest: the art two good test we will see on the budget. one thing both for proposing is cuts to the low end, assistance program. the president proposes that to 2008 levels and republicans propose cuts on that. northeast centers in particular have said that they oppose that. harry reid says he opposes those sorts of cuts. that can be the first test for the president, to see how serious he is about cuts, and the congressional republicans. and the f-35, the ultimate engine program. the pentagon says it does not want. congressional republicans have included it. they have left that in their continuing resolution. the president has repeatedly issued a veto threat over this

period that will be a real test. it is easy money for them to go after and they did not. the president has said he will veto. they will be another test. host: it does not matter who runs against president obama in 2012, the economy will be booming in the unemployment rate will be 6%. obama rules. guest: even the most optimistic economists i've heard leaning toward the democrats has not predicted 6% unemployment. that may be far out but the basic point is correct. the economy seems to be on the upswing unemployment has dropped to 9%, better than what it was. the ash on the blue jobs created is not particularly strong. the stock market says the gdp is growing at a reasonably healthy clip. the economy does not seem to be turning around. we're still 21 months out from the election. a lot can change.

host: stephan dinan, many congressman announcing their retirement. in arizona, senator john kyl saying he will not seek a fourth term. some speculation about representative gabby giffords. guest: as a virginian, i was looking forward to the rematch between allen and web. that would be one of the big senate races. senator webb has announced he will be returning to the private sector. democrats are under a little problem there. their bench is not particularly deep in virginia. while republicans are deep, george allen is the giant in that race right now. there are conservative tea party types who are planning on challenging him.

the republican binge in arizona is also incredibly deep. the democratic and it is slightly deeper than it is in virginia. you mentioned gabby giffords. we have the story that if she runs, if she is up for it in she runs, it is hers for the taking. the amount of goodwill out there for her right now is so exceptional, it is tough to challenge gabby giffords from either side if she chooses to run. guest: there is a long way to go before that. we do not really know her health prognosis at this point. very optimistic reports about her recovery, but let's remember she was shot in the head and we do not know exactly how that will play out. where she will end up medically, the thinking was that she should run for her house seat again in the tucson area. it puts a freeze on all the

other candidates. on the republican side in arizona, there were seven or eight viable candidates, three or four members of congress, others who could jump in, others waiting in see. in virginia, the most we hear about is the former democratic governor. he is the democratic national committee chairman. if he had not become dna -- dnc chairman, he might have a better shot. when you're the head of the party, you have to defend with the president is doing at every turn. some of this obama administration positions may not play well in virginia. it may be more of an albatross than people are thinking. host: he said last week he did not think he had another race in him. he said that before the jim webb announcement. guest: exactly. he ruled out seriously before hand. i have not heard one way or the other what he had said cents. that is exactly the question.

there are a couple of members of congress talk about whether he lost his reelection bid in the that they should be in november. host: another departure, christopher lee. it was the worst week in washington. one of the questions often asked is, what was he thinking? [laughter] guest: who knows? i will say this. the numbers might prove me wrong but there is a sense that people who come to washington believe that the normal rules do not apply to them. i do not know they do not realize that in washington, our celebrities are politicians, that you will get noticed. the nose? host: we talked to steve israel head of the democratic campaign

committee. the special election that will be later this spring. >> i do not know what it is about new york and special elections. every few months, it is back to new york for special election. it is not a slam dunk democratic district. i have an obligation to be honest. is a potential opportunity, if the president obama that 47% there, john kerry got 43%. it is not necessarily a slam dunk. it is a republican district -- that the republicans must hold. >> one of the rumors that we have heard is that the white house official bill burton might be interested in the sea. have you had conversations with bill? >> no direct conversations with

bill. we're respectful of the process. if @ two conference calls with the county chairs, how you feel about the district? this is to we want -- so we make sure that we respect the collaboration. i've had conference calls with the county cheers. we're talking to local leaders, local political leaders. we respect the process and i assume that if bill is interested, is having the same conversations i have had over the past couple of days. host: that was steve israel, referring to the seas last year as well. guest: he is right in that sense. new york of state has seen a number of these elections. there was another one -- kirsten gillibrand, when she was appointed to the senate, plenty of things going on. there was one for the secretary

of the army. he hits on an interesting point. the nominees are not chosen by primary voters. they are selected by county chairs that go behind closed doors and make the decision. it is not necessarily to the party folks in washington might want. you can see funny things going on in this upstate new york special elections. host: on the grisly story, its shows how quickly the story unfolded. we heard about it mid-afternoon, he announced his resignation at 5:00 that same day. guest: that speed did not shock people but i was sitting in the senate press gallery watching it. had that play out that quickly, there are other members of congress who have been through not exactly the same thing but similar situations who are still sitting in congress. for him to have gone in that short period of time was interesting.

why did he go so quickly? i do not know. one person has told me that a theory, that says that he maybe had more of a natural sense of and harassment about what he did then some of the other people still sitting in congress. there was a sense that he got pushed. speaker boehner says that it was his own decision but certainly given all the other things the republicans have going on, republicans were happy to see him go so quickly and not remain and drag out this issues. host: david mark, another election in chicago. by all accounts rahm emanuel is ahead in the polls. it is the majority, he would get elected. guest: the former obama chief of staff, former member of congress from illinois, it looks like he is going to claim the chicago

mayoral seat on the first ballot. he may be pushed off to a runoff, but he seems to be in a commanding position. had he not live there, he had not really been a part of the committee for the past couple of years. he had the name recognition. he was able to unite various factions of the traditional party machine folks, the upper and liberals, north side chicago group, analysts like he has a good shot. host: kathy is joining us from cleveland. the democrats' line, good morning. caller: i have a couple of things that i would like to get off my chest. yes, there are jobs, but they are only 16 hours a week. how can you raise a kid on 16 hours a week? they are not hiring full-time. there are jobs but 8 to 16 hours a week this is not putting on --

food on the table for a full family. obama is trying to get health insurance for the rest of the people who have not got it. number three, the security -- we pay so much money to security but it done not -- it did not stop the 9/11 attack. at midday. we have a good day. guest: the health care one, i'll take care that quickly. we will see this play out. the country is absolutely divided on the health care bill. the polls suggest a certain percentage in favor of repeal, others in favor of fixing it, others in favor of going further. it will play out in the courts and throughout congress. one of the interesting things about the budget -- the continuing resolution for the rest of the 2011 spending bill that that house republicans proposed on friday and will vote on, the proposed stopping

funding for the exact title, a particular office for health reform. they propose to halt the funding for that office. there are ways the republicans are going to continue to try to push this -- not exactly the repeal, but ways to hinder that law. we will see how that plays out. host: the republican line. caller: i think you're dismissing the wrong thing. i think that for him to win last year and again this year is not a matter of a bunch of college students very active and very much a control of the convention. this is a very sustained an active group that is when the

conduct a very intense campaign in iowa and new hampshire that will shock the republican establishment. if he gets the nomination in 2012, it will totally revolutionized not just the republican party but american politics. it is such a way that the republican party will have the greatest shift in its fundamental shift since 1952 when the eisenhower, big government, to cover the party and really stole it from the classical, liberal, small government. guest: i did not mean to minimize their ron paul candidacy. i would tell the caller at cpac, it is a broad gathering of conservative activists from around the country. getting good social conservatives, defense conservatives come and those

who were definitely the most pro-run ball were the young college students. that is not minimizing it. that is where a lot of this support is coming from. that is a very important thing in the nominating process. the caller is is the right. would run poll win the nomination, he would be a major shift in the republican party. that is absolutely true. i am the one that thinks that the next republican nominee will look more like one poll in 2008. but we heard about his strength in iowa back in 2008. we heard about his money bonds, a sizable about money. you may remember the exact percentage that he got in the iowa. it did not translate into major victories in primary after primary. it did not translate into victories. we will see if 2012 is different. but the amount of attention and

money he had could have translated into something less time and did not. host: there is up peace posted online at the politico. rick santorum touched off of media firestone that. to denigrate sarah palin and her response was swift and unforgiving. guest: comments by rick santorum now considering a bid for the republican nomination. his essential message was sarah palin was skipping cpac so that chicago make money, making speeches and other financial ventures. there was some blood back pretty quickly about that. he came in for a lot of criticism. he took it that that was not what he meant. he went after political by name. by the video tape, it seems that what he was implying. he was the first likely

presidential candidate to really criticize sarah palin. he backpedaled on it, but some people think he would've been better off sticking with that line of criticism, punching above his way, getting his name up there, getting mentioned in the same breath with sarah palin. he would seem like a more viable candidates. we will see how the other candidates respond. host: ron paul came in first. coming in second was mitt romney. gary johnson, the former new mexico governor, and the governor of new jersey tie for third place. a great line to david keene, who brought the factions together. nobel peace prizes had been awarded for less. guest: the responses of this.

i number of social conservative birds dropped out of cpac. they had been there holding booths and what not. they dropped out, arguing that goproud is incompatible. this is what we mentioned earlier with the different factions, and the social conservatives at cpac and who does the voting. david keane managed to keep the peace. is the chairman of cpac, he is stepping down as chairman of the american conservative the union. he was able to keep the peace this year. i do not know that this will last through the next year of cpac. there was a lot of push back from these groups that want -- that do not believe that the gay

republican activist groups are compatible. host: 1 sarah palin -- guest: a lot of people would agree with that. if she wants to be in the political agreement, she is going to alienate a lot of people. this is one reason why she might not choose to make the race. she is in a good position now. she is certainly in a lucrative position. why would you want to undergo all these attacks not just from democrats but from republican primary rivals who will have to go after her if she is the front runner? that is how politics works. she and ron paul of the two major factors right now in the republican primary at this early stage. they are the folks that are the major factors there. she has a very devoted set of

supporters. there are also a huge number of folks who are in the anybody but palin crowd. rick santorum, if he stuck to his guns, that was the opening to become the earliest of the anyone but palin candidates. host: stephan dinan is with the washington times and david markets with the political. from birmingham, alabama, good morning. caller: a couple of issues here. one is health care. the democrats do not get it, ok? we came out in massive numbers. states have passed laws against forcing americans to buy anything. that is common sense. we should not have to pay for it. the government has way over reached over the last 100 years.

it is time to go back to the constitution, just like ron paul. the constitution is one to pull the conservative republicans to gather to go back to a constitutional government, which is a quarter of what it should be. it needs to be a quarter of what it is. they are involved in our everyday life. like the sozzled my light bulbs. host: the budget debate will begin in earnest this week. guest: there is something going on here. you have a whole bunch of people who picked up the constitution for the first time in a long time, read it through, lifted the federal government and said these things do not square route. there are a number things the government does right now that you look at it and say how can

that be? but there are 100 -- 200 years of supreme court case law that have allowed all of these government actions to build up. what we're looking at here, and what one paul is talking about, and is the driving force behind the tea party and the republicans doing on the capitol right now, with those two things are colliding. the buildup of constitutional case law in the original meaning of the constitution. we will have that fight in the courts over healthcare and what republicans are putting in the budget. we will have this fight. kohler will see the class she is talking about play out. host: from twitter. he took the coveted speaking spot rejected by sarah palin. we covered it live on the c-span

network. here is congressman west. >> but as be remembered of the pillars of kurd terrorism which will lead us to the new dawn of the new america. the first one is very simple. it is effective and efficient constitutional government, when thomas jefferson said, "my reading of history convinces me that most that the government results from too much government." [applause] therefore let me ask you a simple question -- do you believe that america can survive as a bureaucratic ministate? >> noaa! >> and you are absolutely correct. and i appreciate the emphasis over there. [laughter] [applause] the framers of our constitution, they had one true intent, to put

a restraining order on big government. fiscal conservatism is a derivative of constitutional government, which understands it's right and proper mandate, and that is why next week, we're going to cut $100 million of spending off of the federal budget. host: david mark, there is a dual debate going on with what congressman wes talk about. the continuing resolution debate and the fiscal year 2012 budget debate. first of all, your reaction to conference midwest. guest: it's something to see a freshman congressman giving the keynote speaker. last year it was the land back in that position. -- it was glenn beck in that position. the time before, it was rush limbaugh. is essentially making that argument that we have been discussing this morning and we will hear a lot more of on the

campaign trail in 2012 from the various presidential candidates. it marked him as a rising star and someone who will be out in the public eye a lot more. regarding the spending programs, it is a dual track issue. before the democrats got out of town, to keep the government running they had to pass the continuing resolution which has funded the government at the previous year's level. that runs out in late march or so. congress and the president still have to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year, september 30. republicans in the house, many of the freshmen want to cut $100 billion as congressman west noted. that is a tough lift for a truncated budget year. then that is the next budget year, republican leaders have not been very amenable to kidding -- they had been in the

$30 billion range. it is not clear how it is one of the resolved. host: west palm beach florida for stephan dinan and david mark. caller: first-time caller. i really have to give the wonderful agenda of c-span, what they're doing -- when you watch something alive and you do not fit the sound bites and media of what they're trying to pose, it is a wonderful idea. host: as they say in those commercials, we approve that message. caller: it is so wonderful thing. on a personal note, all little bit less hair mousse. i am agreeing with everything you are trying to say. i was thinking, way back, if it

took a long time for this phone call to come through, but the f- 35, i am an aircraft mechanic and like having dual engines for the whole thing, you have to reconfigure the whole air frame. you should stick with one thing and i'm getting tired of the earmarks being deployed across the idea of all the government trying to be redundant. i just think we have gone into an idea where, you know, we spend absolutely too much money, too much money. what i mean -- host: we would get a response. do not be a stranger. stephan dinan. guest: he mentioned earmarks. one of the things the

republicans -- earmarks are officially gone in the 2011 and 2010. they are rescinding -- they're not rescinding. there are no earmarks in the continuing resolution. both sides have agreed there will not be earmarked requests in 2011. that is a major request. it is still a very symbolic step that congress is taking. all of that, the more important fight will be d f-35 in the alternate engines. we want to see whether obama wants to outbid republicans on cuts. he has a veto threat on any bill that spends for this alternate engines. the house republicans still have that money in the bill. we will see that play out. host: what the president calls investment, the republicans

called spending. on our twitter page -- guest: the basic argument that goes on every day. democrats led by president obama, most democrats on capitol hill would consider spending to be in desman. growing for the future, whether high-speed rail, health care, you cannot cut those kinds of programs because it is going to hurt economic growth in the future. republicans have the different role -- world view. they have the majority in the house and it is the argument we will. going forward. we are already seen democratic members of congress putting a press release saying that you cannot cut these programs because it will hurt people. that is what we will hear four months to come. host: from twitter --

guest: congressional for senate democrats have taken the line that republican cuts are to die -- too deep. you can get to where you can get by cutting waste. that is the line that they are going to use going forward. it is an interesting attack, and gets that the issue of those -- what you're talking about, one person's spending is another person's investment. the white house realizes that has to go further than that proof vice-president by and was delivering a speech at the university of louisville. he literally -- as democrats were saying we should only cut waste, biden said that we will have to cut muscle. this is not just about that. president obama has the middle ground position right now between those senate democrats and house republicans. we will see how that plays out. host: dayton, ohio, car line for

independents. caller: i am commenting on the budget proposal. to hear some of the callers saying they are sick and tired of hearing about the poor, 48% of americans do not pay their taxes, and so i can only -- it is very complex. i listen to you all in the round table. it is like listening to sports, like football commentators. people like me -- respectfully i say this -- people like me, i want to know how is it going to be government for the people? what are they going to do is i do my place, doing my thing as an american, paying my taxes, working hard?

i like to note that i am a divorced mom, left with kids, could not finish my degree. i had to work get these jobs where they do not pay you enough. this is so prevalent in our american citizen. -- system. i would be considered low-middle income. and they are talking about rapport. i am falling off the edge of po or if i can i get decent wages. host: let me put two issues on the table. we're going to get word that there is $90 billion in the pell grant programs which provides grants to college students. capping the amount that they get to $6,500. -- $5,500.

this is coming from the white house budget proposal. caller: and it is coming from government workers who cannot relate to someone like myself. you will hear people come up the middle class who are just over that hump, they have their degree in a given enough money so -- they are still be going to fall over into where i am if things do not change. those things of cutting from the port, i can only relate. i can pay my bills but i have nothing left over. i can see what is going to happen. it is going to affect me. it will make my situation worse when we keep on having this attitude, we cannot really relate. we are paying for the government officials to work for us. ok? host: a couple of quick

question. have you received unemployment in the past? caller: never. host: do you own or rent your home? caller: i have to rent. host: you have any savings? caller: no savings. host: how much do you learn a year? caller: probably about $25,000. host: we will get a response. thank you for calling. guest: these and the conditions of millions of people facing in one form or another. there is a human cost to when you cut programs. this is what members of congress will hear from their constituents as well. what bothers a lot of people about talk of budget cuts is when they feel it is coming down unfairly on their group, when they say, ok, we have to take a hit, but other folks are still getting what they had before, whether it is defense spending, big corporations, you hear more

from the democratic side. republicans have their own view of it. i think it will be a revolution to the fiscal crisis, something that affects everybody, where all groups take a hit, and get their budgets shaved down. host: the unemployment rate, the other number is the u.s. debt clock, $14.1 trillion. guest: the fundamental problem that the government is dealing with is that tax revenue has been completely divorced from spending. over the last several years, spending his summer on the order -- you do this as a percentage of gross domestic product, how much of the economy is taken up by this -- government spending has been on the order of 24% of the economy. i believe that is the number for 2009-2010. revenue is in the order of 50%,

and 8% gap. for every dollar the government spanned, 40 cents of that is being borrowed. that cannot be continued. this is what families go through in congress is going to have to deal with that. there are hard choices to make. the question is where to the tax increases come? where did the spending cuts come? host: of focus on the reagan on the centennial of his birth. he lowered the tax rate but then raise taxes in certain areas 11 times. guest: that is not often brought up by supporters. it is brought up multiple times by people who are not big fans. but it is a good model for what both sides may have to look at. it is not abandon ideology or their core beliefs. it is about of pragmatism. realizing that as stephen said coming you have to cope -- close

the budget deficit somehow. will have real world ramifications on future generations and even our current generation. very difficult choices will have to be made, whether raising taxes, cutting spending, even cutting out popular tax deductions. charitable giving, something like that, which could bring in a good deal of revenue to the federal treasury. host: and there are 30 lobbyist on every issue they will focus on matters something else. as go to lee in bad rouge, louisiana. caller: good morning. i have a cold so you have to bear with me. not got a question and i do see anything in the news media about this. a cut this over the internet -- 11 states are finding proof of

eligibility, that anyone that is going to run in that state has to prove they are eligible. in other words, that they were natural born citizens in the united states. you never see it in the news. when this first guarded, i saw two 43 states, now it is up to 11. i did not know. i imagine there will be over half of the states that are going to pass these laws. i was wondering how this with that election in 2012. host: think for the call. guest: the caller is talking about something that is on the mind on a very insistent group of folks. i have never been able to get a handle on how big that group of folks is. the question the president

obama's citizenship and where he was born. there's no question that people are out there that want to drive this issue, and still question the president's birth, essentially whether he is eligible for president. the new governor of hawaii has promised to get to the bottom of this and make it clear what his current status was. the last i checked in, they were having some difficulty figuring out exactly which documentation to release. we may end up getting an answer. whether it will convince the people who doubt the president's birth, i do not know. guest: that is the interesting thing that the caller is talking about. there is absolutely a movement from people -- not just people question the president. it is a move to establish, if

this is a requirement of the constitution for the presidency, should you have to prove this to the -- i guess, the satisfaction of some sort of authority along the way? that would be with the state effort would be. with a thick anywhere or not, i would not know. host: new clothes in the budget deficit coming have to work from both ends. reducing spending and increasing income. as a way to get there, someone writes about president obama breaking bread with the gop. is try to strike up a more intimate report with republicans with whom he has had a long feud. this is a sport that he will need in the newly divided washington. in a series of private lunches and in the oval office, a meeting with senator john mccain, and even the most chummy of american sporting events, a super bowl party.

>> this is part of a continuing effort to bring down the level of partisanship, infected, particularly after the tragedy in arizona with congresswoman giffords. it was a push to lower the heat of political rhetoric, even if it does not change policy. it is about a political reality. these people are running the house, whether speaker john painter, kevin mccarthy, eric cantor, even though individuals with which the republican -- the obama administration has to do business. there is no harm for having them over to the super bowl party. i am not sure it will change the policy one way or the other. it is something the american people would like to see at a basic level of civility. host: at the super bowl party, pat toomey, a harsh critic of the president. guest: david raises the

question, how far these meetings and get you. i was offered the example of how bipartisanship actually plays out. a lot of attention being given to the tax deals that republicans struck with democrats in the lame duck session last year. if you look that has to, republicans said that tax cuts for everyone should be extended. they got their way. democrats said they need to do more spending on unemployment benefits. they got their way. the federal budget, the long- term federal budget to the hit. when bipartisan ship breaks out in washington, is often the budget that takes a hit. they cannot hit -- happen anymore. that is where i think bipartisanship does break down. host: sandy from detroit, you get the last word. we lost that call. last night on saturday night live, taking a look at the

week's events, including the situation in egypt. there is an excerpt from last night's program. >> history was made friday when hosni mubarak out of pressure from peaceful protesters and step down from office. no were what he would do next. there's only one job available for an 82-year-old man. [laughter] this week was the conservative political action conference, an annual meeting of conservative politicians and activists, or some people call it, tea party, y comic-con. guest: it will be interesting to see what president mubarak does. how do not think it will be in that position, the saturday night live position. guest: i am convinced that there are people who can for trade

george washington or some of these other people, there is money in traveling around as a tea party re-ena >> tomorrow, the president's fiscal year budget will be released. we will bring you live coverage from a baltimore school where the president will talk about budget and education. we'll have reaction from the pentagon, the white house budget office, and members of congress. on tuesday, the house will start debate on spending levels for 2012 with a possible but later in the week. live coverage on c-span. tomorrow on c-span3, a hearing on public employee pensions and state financial problems. live coverage starts at 4:00

p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> the patriot act, passed after the 9/11 attacks, made it easier to do surveillance on terrorist suspects. lawmakers are trying to remember -- read new provisions. you can track the daily for action with time lines and transcripts of a recession. find the full video archive at c-span.org/congress. >> ron kirk announced this week that president obama plans to submit the free trade agreement to congress. these comments came before a house ways and means committee hearing which focused on pending agreements with colombia and panama. this portion is a little more than two hours.

>> mr. ambassador, your full written statement will made -- will be made part of the record. you are recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it is an honor for me to have an opportunity to visit with you today. president obama told americans in the state of the union address that the future is ours to win if we rise to the challenge to compete for and when the jobs in industries of the future, americans must out

in the bay, out educate, and help build the rest of the world. we are doing our part to keep america globally competitive -- competitive and our work has produced results. u.s. goods and services, exports to the first 11 months of 2010 were up. we are on pace to reach or exceed president obama's national export initiative goal of doubling exports by the end of 2014. to ensure that american firms continue to generate jobs and economic growth, opening global markets and enforcing trade rights must remain key components of our economic recovery efforts. after extensive consultations with the business community, with labour, members of congress -- in december we concluded that a u.s.-korea trade agreement is

good for america's all that industry at all the workers. it brought widespread report to congress to bring home its promise -- billions of dollars in exports and tens of thousands of jobs here at home. the president will submit the trade agreement to congress in the next few weeks. we look forward to look -- working with you to secure its approval this spring. but we are not want to stop there. with that same engagement and cooperation, we want to address outstanding concerns relating to the panama and colombia in trade agreements. if we are successful, we will move these forward as well. the president has directed me to immediately intensified our engagement with our partners in colombia and panama with the objective of resolving the issues as soon as possible and

bringing those agreements to congress for consideration immediately thereafter. i must make it clear, there remain issues to be resolved before these agreements can be considered for consideration. -- can be submitted for consideration. they go to our core u.s. values and interests. any timetable will be contingent on the successful revolution of these issues. with regards to columbia, it will be imperative to resolve issues regarding laws and practices in backing the protection of labor rights as well as issues concerning violence against labor leaders and the prosecution of the perpetrators. colombia and panama all have taken important steps create we think that is a good signal, but more remains to be done. blue -- we will be consulting closely with you and major

stakeholders including labor and human rights groups about this process. we will not be left behind as others open markets and take our market share. the president has made one thing clear -- we will not sign agreements just for agreements sake. they must be enforceable and that the highest standard and in the interests of america's workers, farmers, businesses, and the entrepreneur is. traderld's most dynamic market -- we are moving forward to unlock the asian-specific to a trade agreement. we seek an ambitious outcome in which all countries, including the advanced emerging nations, provide market access commensurate with their economic growth. our efforts to bring russia into the world trade organization will include working with you

this year to grant russia permanent normal trade relations status said that u.s. firms and workers benefit from russia's a session to the world trade organization. this year the united states will host the 21 economies of the economic cooperation forum. we will work to make it cheaper, easier, faster, for our firms to trade in a greater regional economy. we are doing the same with our partners in europe and to help north america. aggressive enforcement will continue to accompany these efforts. we have kept our promise to hold our partners accountable through steps to address a harmful surge of chinese products, to the first level and fourth case ever brought to a u.s. trade agreement. our agenda will only succeed if

we make clear to the american public what is at stake in global markets. if we keep faith with america's workers, including reviewing trade adjustment assistance. we are asking congress to keep faith with some of the world's forced a economies and create american jobs which preferences and let's do so for a longer time than a few months. i believe, mr. chairman and the members of the committee, that we can use common sense to find common ground on trade. i look forward to working with you and i look forward to taking your questions. thank you. >> thank you very much, ambassador. as i listen to your testimony, i first want to say that i appreciate your covenants of the south korean trade agreement. it was signed in june 2007. the european union agreement

with korea is expected to be effective july 1. your time line of a few weeks is a very important one. in terms of the other agreements with panama having been signed in june of 2007 -- they signed this exchange agreement -- the recently signed trade agreements with the european union and canada. with regards to columbia, which was signed in november 2006, our exporters at a over $3 billion in duties to columbia. canada will implement a trade agreement in june. the eu is sent to complete one. with regards to those agreements, i appreciate the language that you want to complete those by this year, but frankly those are statements i would expected two years ago.

we are seeing other countries move forward dramatically. we are losing market share in those countries as they develop trade relations with other places. we need specific, concrete steps. can you tell me what specific things or items need to occur with regard to the columbia- panama agreements that would allow the administration to move forward? >> let me assure you, we share your concerns with respect to the competitive market that is developing in south america and they're very aggressive efforts to sign other agreements. but we also share a very firm belief and an unshakable belief that the only way we can go forward in a manner we would like to is if we work together collaborative lee just as we did on the correa free-trade agreement.

-- korean free-trade agreement. not just those that are stopping on the break in st. do nothing. we need to find some common ground on some of those core values. we want to get these done, but we want to get them done in a way where we address underlying concerns about labor rights. this is a little bit different banderilla. we were addressing market access. these are more fundamental issues. what we will intensify of the that several weeks, i am sending 18 to columbia next week. ranking member 11 visited colombia during the january recess. our finance committee chairman is going down. we are meeting with all the stakeholders to come up with a workable plan and sit down with our partners in colombia to adjust them. >> are you expecting to go to colombia and panama as well?

>> i may go. i may wait and see what the plans are. the president is going to south america later this spring. >> the time for generalities as past to say we need to continue to work forward on these. we really need specifics. we need an action plan. we need benchmarks that we can meet to move this forward. these have languished along enough. far too long. to the extent that you can shed light on any specific items, i think we would be all enlightened. >> i wanted to do that, mr. chairman. for example, last year in june president obama directed us to sit down and negotiate with our partners in korea. we were able to do that in a

reasonably efficient time. we want to take that same approach with panama and colombia. the issues are different. in columbia there are longstanding concerns about the rights of workers and union organizers. we have made good progress in panama all in terms of addressing some of their labor law concerns. they have worked with our department of treasury to address the issues of their having been labeled a tax haven. >> with panama, is there anything left for the panamanians to do? >> there are a couple of concerns over some recent changes to their labor law. we have been in consultation with the panamanian government to get those results to our satisfaction. >> thank you. >> mr. chairman, i think your question has helped to frame the

issue. you said the time for generalities -- they were not generalities. the issues with korea were very specific. the way it was negotiated, it did not assure access to the market for our automotive goods. we worked on this. it was very specific. they were shutting us out, shipping 500,000 cars a year. we were shipping 5000. our automotive producers and their suppliers insisted that trade b eight two-way street. it was very specific. -- it was very specific. if the republicans had had their way, where the bush administration, we would not have approved the free-trade agreement essentially having a

major part of our economy shut out of art -- shut out of their markets while they had complete access to ours. the issues were very specific. they related to the violation by panama of basic international standards as outlined in our state department reports in terms of worker's rights and it was a tax haven. we try to work and then they elected someone as a speaker of the house who had an arrest warrant for killing an american. those discussions stopped. it was very specific. when it comes to columbia, the issues of the ambassador has laid out the areas where there are issues. we have been discussing these four years with the colombians. the state department reports that have spelled these out year after year after year.

there is a new administration in colombia which says that it wants to address these issues that were not satisfactorily addressed by the previous administration. now the ambassador has said that there is an effort to see if common ground can be reached. i think there is not a lack of specificity, there is a lack of willingness to work with us to resolve basic important economic issues. let me ask you if i might, mr. ambassador,about t.p.t. and proceeding. you intend to table something next week in terms of t.p.t.?

it will be a tabling of some proposals next week? >> yes, there will. we have had four rounds of tall. -- talks. we have moved very aggressively to meet our own goal which is a trade agreement for the 21st century with high standards in every area across the board. we will be meeting in chile next week for the first round of more intense negotiations and will begin tabling proposals in certain categories. >> everyone should note that most of the participants we have a trade agreement with. it is the newcomers -- vietnam and malaysia. they have raised important issues, not only in terms of worker's writes, but in terms of agriculture, etc..

we hope very much that the for those proposals are tabled that there will be further conversations with this committee regarding the specifics, including those related to investment. >> we will. we have had the most extensive consultations with this committee and your companion committee in the senate as well. all the stakeholders -- we will continue that. it is an opportunity. we are benefiting from the fact that we are starting with a blank sheet of paper, so to speak. we are not burdened by the arguments that had derailed our trade agreements in the past. it is an opportunity for the united states to be in the league for crafting the architecture for what we hope will be the most advanced free- trade agreements in one of the most dynamic regions of the world.

>> i just want to comment, i was concerned about market access on the south korean agreement from the beginning. it is not interested -- i am not interested in white these agreements were not past two years ago. i am interested in why they are not passed now. >> i have a timeline year of a cheat president obama in ministrations statements regarding the columbia trade promotion agreement. unfortunately i will not have time to go through all of that in my five minutes. i would like to have been included in the record. i will just touch on some highlights. ambassador kirk, the president's 2009 trade policy stated "we are in the process of developing a plan of action to adjust the pending

trade agreements in consultation with congress. we plan to establish benchmarks of progress on that columbia free trade agreement." in april 2009 during a speech at georgetown university, you stated "we are looking for new solutions to the issues that have dragged on in existing free trade agreements. president obama instructed me to lead a review of the columbia agreement and to deal with outstanding issues of their." let's get to about a year later. in march of 2010, and your testimony at a sense but -- senate finance meeting. you said a u.s.t.r. was working on the issues so they could move forward on the agreement. in response to a question of the

colombian free trade agreement, you stated "we are hopeful we can come to some solution over the next several months with congress so we can go back to colombia with specific goals. what we do not want to do is keep moving the goalposts. this agreement is almost singularly going to benefit the united states." moving forward a few months to july 2010, announcing the establishment of the president's export council, the president again reiterated that the administration was working to resolve the "outstanding issues with the pending free-trade agreements with the goal of submitting them to congress as soon as possible." now, in 2011 during a speech, mr. ambassador, you stated "we

took the time to create the free trade agreement right. we think it is important just as we have done with korea, let's not short skirt -- short circuit that process with panama and colombia. they are just as important to us." mr. ambassador, how much longer will the white continue until the columbia agreement is ready for congress? it has been two years since the administration announced his plans to create the benchmarks of columbia. we waited one year. the administration then again stated it was working on a list of recommendations for the colombians. where are these recommendations , these benchmarks that the administration wants to see in place? how much longer do we have to wait until the columbia agreement is ready? >> i appreciate your recitation

of our commitment on that. we are firm in that. hopefully it will not be much longer. we share your concern. we want to move for all these agreements, but you can tell when this committee there has been a wide divergence of thought on how to proceed. one thing president obama instructed me was to sit down with those on both sides of the aisle, stakeholders of every opinion on how to go forward and see if we can find a common way forward. we also made a firm commitment we came at to office. -- when we came into office that it was not our responsibility to take all these free trade agreements. we stepped back to take a strategic look at trade and our economic policy. that is how we get our economy going and how we create jobs. that included not only looking

and examining these free trade agreements, but the work we have done on engaging labor, committees, and business to come up with a plan to allow us what we have done with korea. the president announced for us to do the same thing with colombia and panama all. we have new leadership in colombia. the vice president was here last week. we have met with them. there is a renewed sense of urgency on both parts. we will be meeting with them in the coming weeks and months to address those issues. it is different in the case of korea. it is not just related to market access. it goes to some of those core values that many americans want congress to take into account as it relates to how we respect the rights of workers. that is an issue that we will not compromise on. >> i appreciate that, but that

sounds very much like what we have been hearing for the past two years. >> the gentleman's time has expired. mr. johnson is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to recognize my friend from dallas. it is too bad you're not there for the super bowl. >> i did not give to the game. >> ambassador kurt and i have known each other for a long time. i am glad he has had the opportunity to join us on this committee. for the record, he and i used to bet dinners and he still owes me one. [laughter] mr. ambassador, as a former mayor of dallas i am know you are aware of the benefits of trade in our area. dallas is the ninth largest metropolitan exporter in the united states. dallas exported almost $7 billion to both nafta and cafta.

exports from texas to australia averaged $800 million in the three years after that trade agreement, they increased to 66%. texas exports to chile were declining before an agreement. since the agreement, imports have increased by 107%. these numbers tell me we are spinning our wheels. this agreement was signed in 2007 and at this is 2011 and we still have not finished them. i would like to know why we are delaying because other nations in the world are taking our place in the trade environment. it is because you have not been able to finish the job.

most of it, you are telling me, is a labor related. i would like to know your opinion on that and what you intend to do. you get these three agreements done, and he will not have to buy me dinner. [laughter] >> i have enjoyed your friendship. we have enjoyed a lot of mexican food over the years. it would be loath for me to quarrel with a good friend in public. we will not make dinner contingent on this. but nisei this -- -- let me say this -- i was appalled when president obama asked me to serve the administration in this capacity. we believe in trade. we understand it. we've seen the impact in our city and state. texas is the number one exporting state in the country. if you do not have to convince

me how important these agreements would be to our economy. when i took the oath, i agreed to be the united states trade representative for the entire government. my wife is from detroit. it is just not my passion for exports we have from texas, but the concern and frustration of all of my in-laws from detroit, cleveland, and pittsburgh. they believe they have not benefited from trade. what we have committed ourselves to doing is trying to find that common ground. the only way we can go forward in a way that allows our farmers and ranchers want us to go up, is to keep pace with the rest of america that wants to know we have a trade policy that works for everybody, not just for some of us. one of my favorite african proverbs is pretty simple. "you should take no comfort in

the hole in my end of the boat." too much of our trade debate is in places like texas, florida, washington -- -- shake our heads and say porpoised bird, for detroit. that is white these agreements were stalled. there are strong differences on this committee where there we go forward or not. we are trying to not only scrapped trade policy that allows us to have open, fair access to these markets, addressed that asymmetry we have with many of them, but also help us restore the american public's faith that trade can work for us and we can create jobs here. that is what we are working to do with them all at columbia. >> it will create jobs. but how about getting it done? all three of them. can you tell us you will do that? >> i can