the government after march 4. in a few moments, we will take your questions and comments about the president's proposed budget for the next fiscal year and congressional debate on what to do about spending for the rest of this fiscal year. our guests will be john cranford from "congressional quarterly, what republican representative jack kingston from the appropriations committee and representative allyson schwartz, a democratic member of the budget committee. this is "washington journal." [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] host: president obama unveils the 2012 budget blueprint yesterday -- $3.70 trillion. he says it will reduce the deficit by $1.10 trillion over 10 years. by comparison, the deficit commission calls for $4 trillion

in savings over the same time period. the proposal also includes a five-year spending freeze on non-defense discretionary spending for a savings of $400 billion. in total the president wants to spend $18.7 billion in 2012. good morning on this tuesday morning, february 15, 2011. we will get your reaction to the proposed cuts and spending -- start dialing in now. while the president talked about his budget plan yesterday at an event in baltimore, on capitol hill budget chairman paul ryan responded. >> when i was sworn in as president and pledged to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term. a the budget i am proposing today need to that pledge and puts us on a path to pay for what we spend by the middle of the decade. we will do that in part by eliminating waste and cutting whatever spending we can do

without. >> our problem is, we are running down the road to keep kicking the can down. what did we just it today? we got a punt. the president punted on the budget and on the deficit and debt. that is not leadership. that is an abdication of leadership. host: here are some of the details for you to think about before you start dialing in. what do you like and what do you not like? free-spending cuts in the president's 12 -- 2012 budget request -- immunity block grants, something the president said was " due to close to his heart, was cut. key spending proposals for the

2012 budget request -- what are your thoughts on this this morning? john cranford is the "cq" managing editor and he will be with us as we take your phone calls as well. i wanted to begin with what happens after the president proposes a budget for 2012 -- this is just the first that. guest: it is. there are at least half a dozen committees that will take a close look at this proposal beginning this morning. the budget committees in the house and senate will start taking testimony from the chief of budget officers of the federal government and we will hear -- the appropriation committees will have a crack at some time later.

ways and means and the house will look at the tax proposal and the finance committee in the senate will do likewise. it is often the case that presidents' budgets are regarded as dead on arrival when they get sent to the hill. many of the proposals are often disregarded by the opposition party. in this case i think we may be overtaken by events. congress has not yet finished the appropriation process for the current fiscal year and we will see a big fight starting in the house this week on where that spending is going to go. host: on the floor, a u-turn on to c-span, they will be debating a funding measure to keep the government funding for this year. and in committees they are also going to be talking about the president's budget proposal for 2012. two different budget battles happening right now in congress between the administration and lawmakers. we will have coverage on c-span 3 on the house budget committee.

they will be hearing from of the omb director. that is on 10:00 a.m. on c-span 3. then in the senate finance committee, live at c-span 3 at 2:30 p.m. eastern time, hhs secretary kathleen sebelius will testify about her agency's budget. and if our viewers are interested we will cover house ways and means. they will talk to tim geithner, the treasury secretary. said a budget committee will be there. if you are interested, go to our website, c-span.org, for more information when those are slated to air. i wanted to show our viewers the "wall street journal" headline about all of this. if i can find it here -- let me paraphrase. president obama's budget proposal is a challenge to the

gop. i am just wondering, because it does not exclude it entitlement reform. guest: i think what the president has tried to do is perhaps laid down a marker for the left engine of the budget debate we will see starting this morning in the house for 2011. the republicans in the house decided to try to cut $100 billion from the request the president put forward just a year ago, for the current year. that would be $58 billion cut from the current trajectories spending for the current year. i think that -- that fight was going to be big enough but what the president has now done is laid down a marker. this is where he is willing to go, so to speak. he has offered up some cuts in the community development block and service grants, cuts in the low income home heating assistance program, he has proposed other cutbacks in

discretionary spending, but they don't go anywhere near where the republicans would like to take it. i think that that is probably setting the parameters for that debate. host: hard -- how much of the budget are we talking about? if we look at 2012 and the president's proposals and we talk about freezing federal spending and talking about other cuts here and there, how much of the federal budget total are we talking about? guest: the outlays expected for the coming fiscal year, the fiscal year that begins october 1, are projected at $3.70 trillion. of that, probably $1.20 trillion is what is called discretionary spending, money that congress can control relatively easily just through the appropriations process. the vast -- rest is permanently appropriate for and vitamins -- social security, medicare, medicaid, interest payments on the federal debt. that stuff is much more

difficult to control. and congress doesn't touch it very often. as you noted, the president's budget really does not offer many changes in entitlement programs so we are concentrating in this discussion today on the discretionary part of the budget. of that, about 60% of discretionary budget goes to defense. the president proposed a $78 billion, i believe, cut in defense spending for 2012 down from 2011. he has proposed a somewhat bigger cut in what would have been non-defense discretionary spending if he had not already put a freeze in place. he proposed a freeze a year ago and he is now just talking about keeping it locked in through 2015. host: here is the front-page of "the washington post" --

it includes defense and on this and spending. a mandatory, about two-thirds of the federal budget. it used to fund entitlement programs like social security and medicare. that is the front page of "the washington post." if you go inside "usa today," it says not counting on national security and social safety net programs like medicare and social security, spending on other domestic programs accounts for just 12% of the overall budget. it also notes this morning in their paper that social security spending is slated to grow by 75% over the next decade. medicare by 62% and medicaid by a whopping 120%. ottawa, illinois. karen, democratic line. caller: good morning. i have a couple of comments. i am for the high-speed rail -- our roads are so congested that

you can't get around. plus, it would create jobs. i would like to know why no one has brought up -- we have been in wars for 10 years -- why there isn't a war tax? this is the only time in the history of the united states that they have knocked paid for going to war. everybody keeps saying there is a revenue -- there is a revenue problem. they keep cutting taxes. how in the world do they expect to pay for the budget is new keep cutting at the lower end, you don't pay for wars and you give tax cuts that people should not have and they go to the lower end. everybody needs to give a little bit. host: you are willing to pay more in taxes? caller: yes, i am, and i am on

social security and i am so sick to death listening to people saying social security is the problem. it is not. the social security has a surplus. why do they always pick on people who paid into the system? everybody pays for social security while you are working. host: if you are willing to pay more but not willing for social security -- benefits for social security to be decrease -- caller: i am not, know. you don't get that much. that is only part of the program. if you have social security. that is the only thing you can count on. host: columbus, ohio. emily. caller: just wondering if anybody watched in the grandson of roosevelt. he was on about a couple months ago saying social security is great, we still get 90 cents on

the dollar -- and 2035 we will still get 80 and they keep going on and on. it is just our money and they did nothing we should have. i would like to know who will pay for the millions of uninsured if they stop health care. there is an easy way to stop the deficit, get rid of the perks and that bush tax cuts for the wealthy. host: howard, a republican. good morning. caller: to the first caller, when it comes to social security, granted, the money is there -- in paper form, it is the great society that put -- took social security and put it in the general fund and the great society created quite a liberal spending spree. i have a question for your guests. is he there? can you explain it to the c-span viewing audience what you think -- why then speaker nancy pelosi

did not pass a budget? and by not passing the budget, what we are faced with now is continuing resolutions probably until the 2012 election. host: john cranford, talking about the here and now, the 2011 funding, as opposed to president obama's 2012 budget. guest: i can try. a couple of things going on first of all, for the last decade has been quite difficult for congress to complete its budget process. it is a two-step job. the first thing lawmakers are supposed to do is adopt what is called a budget resolution intended to guide budget decisions, including appropriations, tax policy, and even entitlement changes. the second is to adopt appropriation bills to cover the discretionary part of the budget for the coming fiscal year. five times i think in the last decade, the process of

producing a budget resolution fell short, did not get finished. that limited the ability to produce appropriations bills. to say nancy pelosi did not produce a budget -- it takes both chambers, a majority in both chambers to do that and in some cases it takes a supermajority of 3/5 in the senate to make most things happen these days. it is not just nancy pelosi who did not finish. but in fact, the case that congress did not adopt any of the appropriation bills for the fiscal year before going home in december. and when the republicans came back in in january in charge of the house, they have taken their time trying to figure out where to go. even some disarray among republicans as to how far they want to cut. the early proposals from budget chairman paul ryan of wisconsin

were criticized by some in the republican party for being too small, and that is why we have further discussions late last week and over the weekend and in the rules committee yesterday about making a bigger cut when this spending bill does come to the floor today. host: what are you hearing about the likelihood of passage in the house for the 2011 funding for this year to keep the government running until the end of fiscal year 2011? guest: i think it is highly likely by the end of this week the house will pass the spending bill to cover the balance of fiscal 2011. i think it is equal -- equally likely it will fall short in the senate and probably would be vetoed by the president if got to his desk. a lot of us are beginning to believe there is a very good chance we will see maybe as early as march what we had in 1995 and in 1996, which was a

government shutdown when the congress could not agree with the president on how to structure spending for the coming year. host: and the house begins that debate today on c-span, live coverage on this network. let's talk a little bit more in depth and detail about the president's 2012 budget. a separate budget battle looming. this is "the new york post" this morning -- he raises the income tax rate from 35% to 39.6% for individuals making more than $200,000 a year and couples making more than $250,000 a year. he raises the estate tax rate to 45%. he increases taxes on multinational corporations totaling $129 billion over 10 years and raises long-term

capital gains cut tax rate from its 15% to 20%. eliminates tax breaks for oil and gas companies. stephen sloan wrote the story with this headline -- president aims to end tax breaks for highest earners and corporations. what is the political reality? guest: this is nothing more than a reiteration of what he said on the campaign trail to 1 1/2 years ago. this is what he proposed in his budget a year ago and two years ago. he wants the bush era tax cuts not to be extended for couples who make more than $250,000 or more a year and he wants to make some changes in the way corporations that earn money overseas are taxed on those earnings. again, there are oil and tax breaks in this and some other things. but the two biggest things are a change in the way that the bush

era tax cuts enacted in 2001 and in 2003 are continued. this was a fight that he essentially gave up on last year by cutting a deal with the republicans in congress to allow all the tax cuts to be continued for two more years and he will try to remove that fight in the coming year. host: this is "the washington post" -- an agency by agency breakdown. defense department, five runs and 53 billion proposed by the president. -- $553 billion.

pensacola, florida. curtis, democratic line. what are your thoughts on the 2012 budget request? caller: young lady, i have a request. would be asked this republican guests have a question? number one, why it warned they jumping up and down during the budget, the two wars were never in the budget. ask him why. why were the screaming and hollering? and the second question, ma'am,

we ask him why the republicans will not pass a bill saying that my social security funds that paid into for almost 45 years ago into social security and not the general fund? to the budget. the republicans and democrats -- i am a vietnam marine and if they did not do something with the military budget they are both being very insincere and the republicans will be the biggest hypocrite because until they cut the spending in military our country is never going to go anywhere -- ask the gentlemen, your guest, does america spend more money on defense than the whole world? host: john cranford is managing editor for "congressional quarterly, " not a republican guest. he is giving us information on the budget proposal for 2012. let us talk about afghanistan, iraq, the wars, on the budget,

off the budget? guest: yes and no. the cost of the two wars has never been included in the basic pentagon budget request. it has been financed through supplemental spending bills rather than the normal appropriations process. it does not mean it does not show up in the budget accounting, because of course, it does. a defense spending is kind of bifurcated, it has been for the past decades. the cost of the wars was not built into the pentagon's baseline. one reason for that is to keep it from being bloated forever. so that if and when the wars were over and we had a drawdown of troops, then the cost would be reduced without taking away from base military spending. the caller raised another question about the social security money being put into the general fund. it has been lent to the general fund. it has not been put directly into the general operations of the budget.

the social security trust fund since 1983 has been building a surplus and the surplus amount needed to be invested in something so it has been invested in treasury bonds -- bonds, just like the kinds of assault on wall street. so, the federal government owes about $4 trillion to the social security trust funds over time. one thing an earlier caller mentioned is there is enough money in social security. there is a surplus. there is money the federal government owes to the trust funds to cover these benefits, but from now until some time in the distant future we are going to see that income for the social security program is going to be less than expenses for the first time since 1983. host: when people are proposing how to tackle entitlements like social security, the deficit commission proposal, for example, to raise the retirement age or means test the benefits, those kind of proposals are not

for those on social security right now, right? guest: generally they are for people who are not even 55 years old. that is correct. host: iowa. larry, independent. thank you, c-span. and especially "washington journal." what i can't believe is they are cutting the heat assistance for low income americans in half. i think that is going to be -- going to make or break for a lot of low-income folks that i know. people of oil to be choosing between staying warm and heating. -- eating. there are tons that can be cut from defense, and the pentagon -- in the the pentagon's budget. there is tons of money that they don't even know where it goes.

and i think that would be the place. host: what about low income heating assistance -- you are in iowa, what about the four southern states that may see it one month of cold weather? caller: ok, then maybe it is a matter of being cool in the summer time so they don't die of heat stroke. it is not just heating assistance -- it is paying the utility built for the primary heating bill, electric air conditioning for the summer. host: you do not want to see that degreased -- caller: social programs. that is what a lot of -- there's more and more folks better just barely making it now days in

america, it seems to me, and yet the top 1%, they are making all of the wage, profit -- i think they ought to tax the heck out of the top 1%. i mean, 35 to 39% talking about raising for people making over 200,000 a year. what are we getting -- we made these people rich and think it is time they pay back. host: on the low-income heating assistance, do you know people who use that? caller: oh, yeah. a lot of elderly people. you go into the office and you see them sitting, waiting outside. especially with the weather we are getting with climate change. when it does not get up above

zero for five days out of the week, like it in here just recently, it really puts a bite on people when they are. host: vincent. charlottesville, virginia. caller: i heard obama was cutting the pell grants in the new budget and a think there -- it is a shame because there are a lot of things you could cut. education, compared to everything else, is a drop in the bucket. i just wish he would reconsider. host: here is "the washington post" on the education department. it says, among domestic programs, education comes out a winner --

virginia. democratic line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i agree with a lady who called early. all you hear are cuts to social security and medicare benefits. the last two years, medicaid has grown 30%. there have been 11 million people on food stamps, which has grown to 51 million people.

i sing when you -- foreign aid out, we spend twice as much on schools than two years ago. and as far as infrastructure, i think we need to maintain our infrastructure but a hot on building a lot more new roads for about -- halt on building a lot more new roads. host: it would save millions not to -- caller: it would save millions just to maintain what we have. start anyp, but don't really large new projects. caller: help me with delight host: help me with your name. caller: adgee. host: would be said about medicare, medicaid, social security. people who say we need to cap the programs, because they make

up two-thirds of the federal budget. if you don't do something about those programs, tried to rein in the cost, you want to tackle the deficit. at the numbers don't add up. you can take away foreign aid and other things but -- foreign aid, one guest told us on the program that it is in the single-digits as far as percentage of the federal budget. caller: but you have to cut a combination of things. like i said, medicaid has growed 30% -- medicare, only 60%. our elderly people have give and give and give. i am a middle-class american, me and my husband, and we pay into it. 9 million checks a month coming out of the social security fund that goes out to mentally retarded kids come out of the social security fund. the social security fund was meant for retirees.

host: let me ask you -- if you don't mind telling us, how old you are and when you expect to tap into social security? caller: i am 50 years old. i worry about not being there. like i said, they need to make several cuts in different areas. stamp't continue for food rolls to keep growing. we can't afford for medicaid to keep growing. as far as foreign aid -- aid starts here at home before overseas. host: before we go to gary, republican from michigan, take a look of the graphic from "the baltimore sun" on the 2012 spending breakdown. you can see how they break down along the different programs.

the caller was talking about medicaid, medicare, social security. let us go to gary. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am an accountant here in warren and i volunteer at the volunteer income tax assistance program. i think that the people are making these decisions should get out on the streets and see the people who need the aid before they make the decisions. when i saw they were cutting the community services block grants in half, it affects all of the low income and vulnerable people in our society and i feel it is a decision they make without proper knowledge of the people it helps. all these people under the community services block grants are the people who are the low income and poverty in our society and need all the help they can get. to cut that program in half

seems to be very drastic cuts to the people who need it most, especially here in michigan. just some of the people i did taxes for, the whole family, both mother and father are on unemployment. and without community services monies to help support the programs for these poor people, i don't know what michigan and other poor areas will do in these times. host: chuck, democratic line. a passive, texas. -- el paso. caller: i retired after 19 years from civil service, the army civil service, and what happened is i just received last week from the office of personnel management a tax increase with my monthly retirement. my question is, it was not much of a tax increase, i have to

admit, but this is the beginning, i think, of more things to come. one of the things i did not hear any of my congressmen or any of the senator's saying, for instance, senator kyl will be tiring, senator judd gregg of new hampshire will be retiring. they have been in the senate for over 19 years. the senator kyl i know for a fact will be making $140,000 a year in retirement and i only make $750 a month in retirement. i have not heard one word about these down and pay more taxes than i am. host: we will be talking to two lawmakers in the house coming up at 8:00 eastern time. jack kingston, republican from georgia, member of the appropriations committee. then around 8:45 eastern time we will turn our focus to the 2012 budget and talk to allyson schwartz, democrat of

pennsylvania and member of the house budget committee. roger, independent. you are next. caller: yes. the obama budget, it still raises the national debt. and did well for as long as obama is in office. that is not acceptable. the only practical way to reduce the budget, the deficit, and save this country from bankruptcy is to cut all the federal programs across the board equally. that includes defense spending, social security, welfare, food stamps, section 8 housing, you name it. everything has to be cut. and that is the only way you are going to be able to do it. because otherwise every special interest group will block the cuts and it will to be enough to do the job. host: did you say medicare,

medicaid, social security? chemical everything. cut it all. it is unfair to cut medicare and social security because those are earn the benefits that people have paid into but that is the only way you can do it. everybody has to share equally -- otherwise you get the petty little squabbles about, don't cut my home heating oil assistance because i am too poor, whatever. don't cut this program or that program. and everyone would just fight against each other and they will point out, you did not cut the other guy as much as you are cutting me. host: let's talk about some of the so-called winners of president obama's budget proposals, and that is transportation departments. "the washington post" has 53% increase from 2010 budget.

let's go to john cranford on the news desk and talk about infrastructure investments the president wants to make. how are republicans responding?

guest: highways are an interesting problem here. there is a lot of blood faugh -- money spent year after year to maintain major highways. the gasoline tax has not been feeding into the trust -- transportation trust fund the way it was supposed to and there has not been enough money to cover the obligations that were, in theory, allowed. there has been debate about how to restructure the highway trust fund, there has been debate about how to find new ways of financing the infrastructure projects. and what the president is proposing in the long term is essentially to create a bank for these projects that would be outside the ordinary appropriations process and would be able to make loans, to make investments. i think the idea here is to put transportation on a more solid financial footing.

host: before we go to the next phone call, let me show our viewers the "usa today" article below the fold. i think it is in the money section, actually. they say this --

wesley, rhode island, a republican. you are next. talking about the president's 2012 budget proposal. caller: greta -- it is credit, right? i need to ask one question. i am 68 on medicare and social security. one thing the previous caller said -- i only get $830 a month and they take $96 off of my medicare, which i did not think i hardly use anything in the last three or four years. he is right, cut across the board. my question is this.

i among medicare -- who gets medicaid? who gets medicaid? host: john cranford, kenya generally tell us -- can you generally tell us? guest: a state federal -- state program for health services provided for people within one month and a 35% of the official poverty line. people who -- 135% of the party line, near poor as well as poor. services are provided by physicians who are paid at a relatively low rate comparatively to what private costs are. the states share in the costs and they administer the program. host: texas, susan, democratic line. caller: i am kind of glad the republicans have in the house.

we will really see them for what they are. they always hit the middle and lower classes to sacrifice but not their big buddies. they are not tackling things like a huge amount of money they receive from lobbyists. work on getting the money out of the lobbying business. they don't tackle their own salaries and benefits. they want to give everything over to private business so that all of those jobs can be outsourced and cost more. they will not tackle money wasted -- especially for the war. they don't want to get into regulations for wall street which has caused this mess. here in texas, that lady that was talking about the infrastructure, the roads, we are having roads built by spanish company and not an american company. why don't they want health care?

host: let me point you to "the washington post," the fed page. this deals with the 2011 budget. what the house will take up today. that continuing resolution that will fund the government through the end of 2011. a separate budget battle than the 2012 put out by the president. here is what it says -- house republicans turn the budget knife on themselves -- on their chamber.

california. republican. caller: the first thing i would like to say is, these people keep talking about class. to meet, class only means one thing -- you can be poor, you can be middle, you can be rich -- either have class or you don't. what i would like to bring up -- i did not know if you remember or not, i think it was back in the 1960's, they had a big deal about the ceo of the red cross. he made more money than any other ceo in this country. what i say is, cut the

nonprofits, the tax exemption by 50%. see how much more taxes that brings in. i guarantee you -- and people with money are the only people who get to deduct from income tax. host: another caller mentioned retirement. this is a reporting from fox news -- jeff blake, a republican from arizona will make a bid for a senate seat soon to be vacated by john kyl, announced by a statement from the national republican congressional committee. newark, delaware. mary, democratic line. caller: i would like to say about the medicaid -- it is pitiful how they are doing medicate. it needs to be revisit the -- revisited. i know a lot of people who work 50 or 60 hours a week, young people, and they are getting medicaid and i don't understand

how they can get it when i know people who need it can't even get it. host: let us look at the department agriculture under the president's 2012 budget proposal. $23.9 billion in discretionary funding for the department. a decrease of $3.2 billion with the biggest cuts coming from direct payments to high-income farmers, rural home loan programs and wetlands conservation programs. now to do, california. robert, independent be up -- now to dew, california. robert, independent. caller: high-speed rail. 90% of all trips are in the same county. i do not think it will do much and congested. i think we need to focus on urban transportation systems that actually make a profit.

this is something every public transportation system. i think there are private-sector solutions to solving congestion in the cities that don't require -- it doesn't mean we have to spend on high-speed rail. host: takoma park, maryland. robert, republican line. caller: good morning. it just wanted to comment, a couple of callers ago, a young lady that called that this will expose republicans for today are -- they hit the middle class and the poor. the top 1%, they pay something around 30% of all income taxes. and when you go down further in the top 50% income earning -- this is all of the irs, their website. if you go to the top 50%, they are paying something like 80% of all income taxes. i don't see how anyone can sit there and say, and allow people to say, mind you, that the rich are getting off scot-free in

this whole budget versus tax debate? that is all i got. host: a lot of discussion in this town about how much federal workers make. how the federal workforce makes out in terms of the 2012 budget in terms of hiring. this is from "the washington post" metro section did you see the change from 2011 to 2012 and change in estimated employment. agriculture down, commerce down. energy department would go down. health and human services up. homeland security up. housing and urban development up as well. all the different agencies that would see an increase in the number of federal employees. new orleans, louisiana. democratic line. caller: how are you? host: doing well.

caller: i would like to say that i agree with the president's proposal on the budget cuts and they need to go a little bit deeper. i receive social security. i am disabled. but i still try to work part time because what i am receiving from social security does not cover my expenses and everything. i just wanted to say that we have to start somewhere if we don't start anywhere we will never get to where we need to be. we have household budgets where i have to pay rent, utilities, gas, insurance, and all of that, and i can't even cover that with what i get on social security. my children, who are grown, who have families of their own. and talking about the helping people with their utilities and heating costs -- i live in the south. of course, we don't have the brutal winters like of the north. but there is so much waste, fraud, and abuse in so many of

the social programs. we need to start at local level and then go to state and federal. because some of these of governments -- especially louisiana i do not agree with how he is running the state because he is trying to cut programs for education, for the poor, and it is just horrible to sing -- see how rural lanes is still under water so to speak after hurricane katrina. host: "the washington post" compares president obama's proposal to what the deficit commission said. what is not included in the president's budget proposal --

st. petersburg, florida. dee is a republican. caller: i wanted to ask your guest about social security and the $4 trillion in iou's. if the government would pay that back, it seems to be social security would be fine. plus, we don't need more money in education. i worked in the field for 30 years. they just need to work it better. thank you. host: do you have an answer? guest: the social security trust funds have loaned about $4 trillion, as the caller said, to the general funds of the government. that money will be paid back as it is needed to cover benefits. that is the entire point. beginning this year, i think that will start happening. because the income from social security will not match total benefit costs. we will see some of that trust fund surplus be drawn down over

time. the problem is the to the -- within 15, 20, 25 years, all of the surplus will be eaten up because of the change in demographics. we will have far fewer people paying an and far fewer people -- more people in retirement. of the problem with social security, to the extent there is one, is the longer-term cash flow management problem. that is what people want to try to address, again, over the longer term. it is not a problem for tomorrow, not today, but 10 years from now. host: we have been talking about winners and losers in the president's 2012 budget request. put aside entitlement spending. which agencies do you think mayor is going to be the most fight over? guest: i think probably health and human services, because the republicans, who are very unhappy with the health care overhaul enacted a year ago want to try to stop all of the money that goes to hhs that covers the

cost of implementing the healthcare bill. that is where we are going to see a huge fight, i suspect. h., talking about the president's 2012 -- host: talking about the president's 2012 budget proposal. this is just the opening act of the 2012 budget. the spending plan is the first that, according to the baltimore sun, in a process that will involve 40 congressional committees, 24 subcommittees, countless hearings and a number of floor votes in the house and senate with the aim of getting funding in place for the federal government by october 1. debate on another continuing resolution to get to the end of september, the end of the fiscal year, begins today in the house. live coverage on c-span. mississippi. carl is a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. good morning.

louisiana, it has been a cold winter. i was watching c-span last night and carl sessions was on from alabama and i was surprised he didn't realize there is no passenger train going through alabama anymore after katrina. we need high-speed rail. we invented and we lose the patents and other countries develop it and use it. i think this country is a beautiful country and you should see it from the ground. i take the train all the time. we could not afford i-95, we cannot afford i-10 -- we can't afford this but we got to do it. host: i think you were referring to as senator jeff sessions -- caller: yes, ma'am. host: that is all right. he was at a news conference with the house budget chairman paul ryan, republican from wisconsin. responded to the president's budget proposal. if you want to watch it, go to c-span.org.

monterey, california. mark, independent pretty caller: hi, greta. thanks very much. i want to say something about social security but i want to mention "the washington post" article that talks about "investment." that is a loaded term. when the government talks about investment is spending and whenever you hear someone say invested we should spend -- translated to spending would cause an assessment would confer upon it some form of legitimacy that has not yet been earned. on social security, what american people don't realize is two supreme court cases have stated that we have no constitutional right to social security. these are general tax revenues and they go into the general fund of the government. davis and thomas are two supreme court cases that says of the federal government has no legal

obligation to pay social security to anyone. they may have a moral obligation but not a legal obligation. i think when we start talking about trust funds -- they don't exist. that is just sleight of hand accounting. the reality is -- and you can look it up in these particular court cases -- that the taxes are nothing more than internal revenue as that goes to the general fund of the u.s. treasury. host: paul, republican. jackson, tennessee. caller: good morning. my biggest issue is our government that came into office starting january. we have a lot of serious issues like we are talking about. but the sad thing is here we are in the middle of february and we still have not done anything about the fiscal year budget now. they did a temporary pass and december to get us to march 4. now we have gotten to the point that now they are trying to do

something with the 2011 and the 2012 budget, which is basically all political. because if our government wanted to be serious about our issues that need to be dealt with, and we have many, why are they not working seven days a week? why are they not locked in their chambers working these issues out until something does get resolved for the american people. that is my biggest issue with our so-called government. host: green bay, wisconsin. another paul, independent. caller: i would like to direct us into another direction and little bit. i would like to see pay cuts for all federal employees of 25%. these people need a reality check. and i would like to see the benefits -- going to help savings accounts, and that would

like to see going to 401k's like the rest of america. host: let us look at the environmental protection agency and how it fares in the president's budget. this is from npr. the proposal would cut spending for the epa by about 13% --

that it is the epa's budget according to npr. it will last phone call and then we will talk to of john cranford. republican line, ohio. caller: looking at the federal page on the computer yesterday and i saw there were plans for at least five new embassies, and i of wondering how that will -- i am wondering how that will affect the budget. guest: i have no idea what the polls is to spend money on new embassies. i do know over the last several years we have had new construction projects planned, mostly for security reasons, in the wake of terrorist attacks. the state department has tried to upgrade its embassies. host: as we wrap up our first hour on this discussion with our

viewers, i want to turn to "the wall street journal" and an article -- the third rail of cuts. he mentions in this column this morning that when the pew research center survey americans this month -- this month about american spending, just 12% wanted to cut spending on medicare or social security and only 6% wanted to reduce spending on veterans benefits. guest: i think that study was very interesting. people didn't want to cut and run -- anything. they did not want to cut education, social security. and only about half of those surveyed said they thought the deficit was as big an issue as the lack of jobs, and wanted more money spent by the government to try to promote job growth. so, the pew study does suggest there is a lack of certainty on

the part of the american public about how the budget process ought to go forward. host: what does that mean going forward for this debate over the 2012 budget request? guest: id numbers who expressed concern there is no leadership in washington may be stressed that there will be continued confusion and lots of partisan bickering over where to go next. host: our next guest is mr. kingston, republican of georgia. we will be talking about 2011 funding, the continuing resolution, the stopgap measure to keep the government running through the it is hard for me to know. the republicans have tried to get a plan that now would cut about $100 billion from obama's request from a year ago.

they will succeed eventually in getting it through the house. i do not think it will go much further than that. host: thanks so much for spending in our with our viewers here. we want to turn our attention to 2011 and are continuing resolution to fund the government for this year. rep. jack kingston is our guest. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ >> one of was sworn in as

president, a pledge to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term. the proposal today meet that pledge. >> $3.70 trillion budget would reduce the deficits by -- over the next few years. you can watch this online at the c-span video library. search, watch, clip, and share, it is washington your way. >> you are watching c-span. every morning is washington journal, a program about the news of the day, connecting you with elected officials, and journalists. and at night, supreme court arguments. on the weekend, the communicators, and newsmakers, q&a, and prime minister

questions from the british house of commons. you can watch this anytime on c- span dot org. c-span, washington your way. it is a public service provided by the cable companies. >> "washington journal" continues. host: let's talk about this continuing resolution 42011. republicans -- for 2011. republicans were looking for a certain amount. guest: it is important to remember, we have two budgets we are looking at right now. one is the budget from last year that was not passed. what we are doing is we are trying to finish up 2011, and at

the same time, the president has introduced the budget for 2012. we want $100 billion in cuts out of way, vote on it this week, send it over to the senate, and then we can finish up 2011. we are going back into programs. the there are a lot that we are eliminating. about 147 programs we are eliminating, a 8.5 billion in earmarks, 2 billion in unspent stimulus funds. we are doing a little bit here and a little bit there. we are nibbling around the edges on health care stuff. the president mentioned in the state of the union address, we are going after it health care. things like that -- some philosophical differences in the party. that is what it is all about. the speaker will have a modified open rules that any member can

offer an amendment and join in the debate. we have not had that in place for a long time. host: what are you hearing about amendments that may be controversial for some of our viewers? guest: and the one person -- steve king had some. what is important is if you do not like the cuts that we as republicans are putting on the table, no problem. offer your own. democrats and republicans need to understand there is a big deficit problem. for every dollar we spend, 40 cents is gone. if you do not like our cuts, put your cuts on the table. host: do these cuts include anything for medicaid, medicare, social security? guest: it will go after some of

the obama care. we are going to try to put limits on that. i understand the chairman of the appropriations committee that will have oversight of that may have an amendment. i do not know if the rules committee has agreed to it or not. they may offer an amendment, and it was not accepted. right now, on the 2011 budget, we are not -- we are looking backwards on bills we have already done. discretionary spending -- we are looking at mandatories ending, which requires a changing of the law. we want to look at it for 2012. it is. to take a lot of testimony and things like that. -- it is going to take a lot of

testimony in things like that. host: the reporters at the news conference with house chairman paul ryan and the ranking republican, they asked him what are you proposing on entitlement reform? he said, i do not know yet. we are not there yet. is it fair then to criticize the president for not taking a look at this when republicans have not? guest: i think there is absolutely enough blame to go around. we know we need entitlement reform for over 20 years now. everybody can share a little bit of the plane. -- blame. he put his budget on the ground, and we have a deficit reform committee.

it is very bipartisan. i think part of the leadership he has punted on. i think the president of the united states has a higher standard in expectation of the american people. there is disappointment on that. host: that we show our viewers an editorial this morning. it is critical of both sides of the aisle. how do you respond to that? guest: we are talking about moving the ball from the goal line to the 30 yard line. if you have a dollar and pay me 97 cents, we are not even, but it is pretty close. $100 billion is a big cut in the

context of over $1 trillion. it is a hollow debate. that is why we cannot get anywhere. the democrats do not like what we are proposing, so let them put their cuts on the table. host: here is the "manager of constitution" yesterday. -- atlanta journal constitution" yesterday. they noted the impact of these cuts for low income people in states like georgia, your state. what are you hearing from constituents and their interest groups? are they calling you up? what have you heard so far?

guest: i had an open mike town meeting this weekend. i had about 100 people there. people realize what we are up against. when you are borrowing 40 cents on every dollar you are some spending, you need cuts. we have over 61 million people receiving a monthly federal check. from social security to foreign payments, a veteran payments, medicare, medicaid. that is why we keep going over the you cannot reduce the budget without getting into some of these and very sensitive and important social programs. we all understand that. we read an article that shows [unintelligible] that is the situation we are in right now.

darned if you do in the dark if you do not. host: defense secretary gates had a news conference yesterday. he talked about the 2012 budget proposal. he also dealt with 2011, the continuing resolution that congress is working on. here is what he had to say. >> the department would only receive $526 billion, a cut of $23 billion. the damage done across our military from that reduction would be magnified as it comes halfway through the fiscal year. i wanted to talk about this, because i am concerned about the debate over the defense budget. it is becoming increasingly distant. it is distant from the real world. suggestions to cut defense by such a large number have largely become exercises in simple math. it is divorced from serious

considerations of capabilities, risks, and the level of resources needed to protect this country's security and vital interests around the world. host: the concerns there for the nation's national security? guest: i agree with the secretary. we are trying to put the continuing resolution on top of the normal appropriations bill for the department of defense. the chairman of the committee, we are all in agreement that we want a defense bill. during the time of war, we need to fully fund of troops, other weapons systems, the justice, everything else. at the same time -- logistics, and everything else. what we are navigating, is choppy water.

we want a full bill instead of continuing last year's resolutions. host: a web site lists all of the proposed cuts in this continuing resolution. veteran affairs, cuts to prior- year access funding. guam construction. will those in your area be impacted by these cuts? guest: probably particular ones. there will be things affected. it is important that we realized it everyone will be taking a hit. a recent -- research bill will not be funded.

it does occur in my own district. [inaudible] host: will military installations be saved from cuts? guest: no. if the department of defense has to pull something out of the budget from the state of georgia, it is in the best interests of america, i am for it. host: democrat line, south carolina. caller: i have a question if they commit. i have melanoma. my wife is a severe diabetic. we are both of a retired age. if we have these problems, how is this going to benefit me? a few years ago, i sat down and watched the news.

demonstrators marched about a village in vietnam and said they had to destroy the village in order to save it. is that what we are doing to our country? i will hang up and listen to your response. guest: remember the context. right now, we are borrowing 40 cents for every $1 we spend. we borrow a lot of that money from the chinese government. we need to do something. the spending cuts we will be debating this week are 2.6%. it will not be pulling the rug out from anybody. it is not cut veteran programs or so security or medicare. so security will probably benefit from those. moving forward, if we want to help, and we all do want to help people like you who are no longer able to work because of a disability, possibly related to military service, we need to

have money there to help people like you. everybody who is able needs to be working. host: republican in tennessee. caller: i have a question i'd like to ask that is two parts. our tax break that the rich got, and some not take it, since they already have money. when they retire or get booted out of office, they draw social security, thousands of dollars a month. i call it entitlement. they are no good to us anymore. do not give them that money. guest: i am not sure if you are talking about elected officials or rich people. those are two separate groups. there are proposals to lift the earnings cap on social security.

there is a proposal from the deficit commission to tax people who have a higher threshold for eligibility on medicare for rich people. in terms of members of congress, you have a shot at us every two years. that is what happened this last november. host: ohio, independent. caller: the only people who cannot control their weight are the wage earners and the poor. rich people and corporate earners of these companies, they adjust prices to make up for their taxes. they raise the prices, the people buy the product, they pay the taxes. thank you. guest: one of the things i have always been suspicious of is big government and big business.

we often talk legislation to limit competition so big business has an inside track and the small mom-and-pop businesses cannot compete as well. i think what we need to do -- not have crony capitalism but open market, free competition, so that everybody has a chance at the american dream. the host:rep. jack kingston is our guest who sits on the appropriations committee. the house will discuss funding for 2011 through the end of september. we can hear some of the cuts proposed by the committee. 1.3 billion from the community health centers. office of science, 1.1 billion worth of cuts. energy efficiency programs, 899 million. centers for disease control, 70 to 55 million. international food aid, 554 million. "u.s. a today"has this headline

in the paper. the market could present challenges to the tea party. now comes the hardest fight. guest: it is very important. those beating out of the trough have the most vested interest. they will put the time in two lobby, where is the tea party movement is the mainstream american moms and dads oliver who have taken time out of their family and work to do politics on the side. they are competing against full- time lobbyists who are paid to be effective and sway public

opinion. eight new returned member from new hampshire already had special interests running against him for an election that will not be from 20 months from now. the organized, highly funded lobbyists -- p.t. party, no question -- the tea party put republicans back in the majority, because they are conservatives. so far, i have been pleased with this. we have months ahead. host: given that in this debate over cuts in spending, where do you see the pressure coming from? how did the tea party people respond when favorites such as

michelle or steve king of iowa were approached about sitting on the appropriations committee, much like many of these freshmen, and they said they did not want to be part of its? guest: they have their eyes on other committees. michelle is interested in the intelligence committee. steve king is interested in some of the health-care issues. we did get cynthia, who is a very hard-core conservative. we have a tom and jeff. they are associated with tea party folks. we have a conservative committee led by al rogers. we want to reduce spending. we keep returning to the hole in the boat that is causing us to sink. with every dollar that is spent, 40 cents is barred. if you do not like the cbc cuts -- cdc cuts, tell us where you

think they should be reduced. we do not want to tax foreign aid, but it is less than 1% of the budget. you cannot just to reduce foreign aid alone or farm subsidies. host: are you willing to compromise on the issue of raising taxes in order to get to the numbers right? many economists say you just cannot do this by spending cuts alone, even if he would after so security, medicare, and medicaid. guest: everything has to be on the table. i would co-sponsor an ad, which does set up like a braque alignment. if congress is unwilling to do common democrats and republicans will have an outside

commission. we will take a vote on their recommendation and move forward from that. the big concern i have is when you put taxes on the table, it usually becomes use for more spending rather than deficit reduction. the line in the sand would have to be only for real deficit reduction, not to spend more money on programs. host: talk about the continuing resolution for f.y. 2011. there is this showdown set up between democrats and republicans. if you do not pass another continuing resolution, the government shuts down. is it worth that? guest: i am sad that the senate democrats would have that attitude. what he is saying is that it will be business as usual in

washington, d.c. we will point fingers at republicans for being extreme, pushing elderly and on the street. we will get the special interest books -- groups. but to no one cares about the next generation. remember how much does this generation want to pass on to our children and our children's children? this calls for a higher calling in the business as usual. i hope the democrats in the senate will take the charge and say, let's have a debate. maybe we do not want 100 billion, but 60 billion. maybe we will not cut of these items, but cut of these items. let's have a real discussion. we get it and we want to be part of the solution. host: you are willing to compromise. guest: i think it could be 120 billion. there will be an amendment on the floor that will increase it

to a lot higher numbers. many numbers will be offered in the debate. right now, we need to compromise to get something done. this is, let's get a bill done. this bill this week is going to be the first of many that the house republicans are going to go after. we will keep hammering away. host: nancy in kansas city, missouri. caller: i would like to ask a question, please. i am a senior citizen, not too old. i have an education degree. i want to teach. when we get to our fifties, we apply for jobs in teaching, and we are told we are over- qualified or not the type of person they are looking for.

we are people that are vital and energetic and want to help this country. we want to help the country pay down the debt, but we cannot get a job, because our career fields, we are discriminated against. we are told we are not qualified or something to that effect. guest: there is a program called experience works. if you will call my office in washington, we can hook you up with the kansas version. i know they will be glad to help you. older workers are retrained or helped to find new jobs. i agree with you. you have a lot to offer. i am a son and brother of a teacher. experience in teaching is so important today. they need all ages of teachers. god bless you.

host: mason city, iowa, republican. go ahead. caller: thanks for taking my call. i do not know if -- the way we will get out of this mess is cut spending, raise taxes. host: are you willing to pay more in taxes? caller: i am, but washington has proved to me over time that they are not responsible with my money. i do not think people have a problem paying taxes, but they are sick of washington wasting our money. it it's bothersome. people are hurting. host: how would you describe yourself? middle class, higher income tax caller? caller: i own a bar.

people are hurting out here. i see it. i respect what the congressman has to say. he kind of summed it all up. congressmen do not have the courage to vote against these things. guest: i think part of the tea party movement was a backlash against business as usual. the senate budget leaders, it is not time to say we are not going to do anything. to me, when you look at the fact that our national debt is 96% of the gdp right now, $40 trillion in national debt, we are $900 billion from china. we owe them that much money. so we cannot negotiate with them. we cannot tell them to get out of north korea.

it is a national security issue. because of that, washington democrats and republicans, rather than debate, are throwing water at each other. we need to come together. i think things should be all on the table. i may not want a cut here or that may be too much. but put it on the table. let's all be willing to talk. the budget -- there are three major expenditures. medicare, medicaid. we have to be willing to talk about it. if we bring it up, we cannot be voted out of office the next year. that is what is so tough about entitlement reform. i have 17 so security reform town meetings. if you do not believe the

freedom of speech is not alive and well in america, come to one of these town meetings. everyone agrees that there is a problem, and we should do something about it. if you put everybody at the table, parents, grandparents, grandchildren, you can solve the long-term budget problem. host: here is a tweet. i think it is referring to the 2012 budget proposal. guest: in the know earmark band that we are operating in, port funding has always been done by earmarks all over the country. we are looking at cost benefit analysis, looking at the causes that create jobs. it has bipartisan support and support from the president of united states. for every dollar he spent, there is a fourth of $5 return.

host: infrastructure spending does create jobs. guest: it does. you have to have a road to get to school and to work. host: the president will be talking about 11:00 a.m. eastern time this morning. go to c-span.org to find out our coverage of that. sarasota, fla. a caller:. i am a disabled veteran. one thing i know for sure. when president clinton came in office and put an economic plan in place without one republican vote, it created 23 million jobs. what did bush to do in creating jobs? zero. guest: the bush tax cuts did created jobs. unfortunately, we had the meltdown on the mortgage side.

it was brought on by fannie mae and freddie mac, a government program that underscored the credibility of the market. it was a complicated problem. under bush, we had a lot of jobs created. right now, we want to work with the president to create jobs again. that is why spending is very important. 6% of the 2010 budget is paying interest on the national debt. that is over $200 billion a year. you could put in infrastructure or put it into education or research. right now, it is going to the bondholders, many of whom are chinese. host: here is what someone writes.

guest: i do not worry about who might contribute to is our. i do not make my decisions based on who has or has not contributed. in terms of the defense spending, we have a $16 billion from it in this honor to billion dollars cap. i believe we have to have defense on the table. the big money is so security, defense, medicare, and medicaid. if we balance the budget without talking about those things, you would be remiss in your job. host: talk about a second engine for an aircraft. secretary gates talked about it yesterday. i want to show ever view is that and then come back and talk about it. >> they have not spoken with one voice on this matter. they have been operating under an ambiguous guidance at best. given the situation, i have decided continuing funding this

extra engine on a month-to-month basis. i did this not because we had to, but because we chose to give congress the opportunity to resolve this matter part of its ongoing debate on the budget. this also means the american taxpayers are spending $28 million a month for an excess and unjustified program that is slated for termination. guest: congress has spoken critically on it that we wanted an alternative engine. the reason they did that -- and this is a good bipartisan committee. there has been some disagreement. i have talked to many pilots about do you want this version. in their educated opinion, they say two engines give them options and keeps the cost down. when you are buying 2500

engines and start with maybe 5000, the problem is that some think the defense department is exempt from competition. c-span is great. it would be better if there were another c-span. and host: there is, the seast and three.an two [applause] [laughter] what about the $28 million figure? taxpayers' money for a second engine that they say they do not want? guest: they are saying that they want. we have testimony about this. there is honest disagreement. you get into the technicalities of this stuff and most members

of congress are not the jet pilots or engineers. they do not know. the vote in the house last year was overwhelming for a second engine because of increased competition, bringing down costs, and increasing performance. host: are their jobs at stake in your district? guest: there is a plant i think in columbus, georgia. the vote for me would be to have one engine. i think two engines will be the best in the long run. host: republican, missouri. caller: i have a few questions about this money we borrowed from china. what are the terms and conditions of that loan? what is the collateral? what is the length of the note? is the government borrowing that money on my behalf.

can i tell the government that we do not want the government to borrow money from china? guest: it is about $900 billion. we buy it in chunks here and there as needed. i am not sure what the interest rate is. i know over all that in 2010 we spent over $200 billion as a nation, a lot of it going to china. i think the u.k. is our second- largest creditor. it crawled out the credit market. if you are trying to borrow on this, it is going to drive up the cost for you as a small lender. it is a risk from a national security stand point. you cannot be tough on china when you owe them $900 billion.

they will laugh at you. host: tom is a democrat in pennsylvania. caller: i have a couple of questions for you. how much money has been budgeted for the illegal aliens in this country? there is like 12 to 20. that is where the estimate is. they get benefits -- medical, schools, things like that. it is an economic situation. we cannot afford to pay for people that are not putting anything into the system. the defense thing -- i do not think people who are not in the defense department understand what is going on with that. you need the competition. i have been involved with that. guest: i appreciate the second comment. on the first comment in terms of illegal aliens, it does cost as

in emergency roads, hospitals, school system. it undercuts wages for american workers. [inaudible] they have to have a working wage worth their time. if you have somebody legal doing that for $5 or $10 an hour, under market, it will take away those jobs. we need to crack down on it. if you were talking in terms of the continuing resolution that we will be debating this week -- we do not cut the budget of the border patrol. we want to keep the border strong. we increase funding for electronic verification, said that when employers hire somebody, they can verify electronically if they're so security numbers are legitimate or not. that is one way to crack down on it. host: another retreat from a

viewer. -- tweet from a viewer. guest: there is a case to be made for that. they are tasked with making sure as most do work. some do and some do not. the fastest tanks and airplanes, accurate missiles, because we wanted them to fight and win and come home and be safe when they are on their way back. we need to have a researcher done, but we need to make sure it is not over the wall or because a retired officer says this is a good idea. we need to have more science in it. host: on auditing the pentagon's budget, here is what one person rights.

he said none of the budget is in a position to be audited. the department is not qualified to talk about efficiencies if they do not know where the dollars are going. they cannot comply with the law, if they do not have a mechanism in place to perform the audits. guest: i would agree with him and force who is a member of the defense committee. we have to measure the pentagon with the same yardstick that we would measure welfare. we cannot let our emotions cloud cover thinking. they do not have to comply by all of the business rooms -- will send everything else.

host: why not? guest: since 9/11, they have sort of been given a pass. a lot of money has gone into first responders and homeland security. if you question it, you feel unpatriotic or accused of being unpatriotic. but we have to put it all on the table. we are all in the same lifeboat together. host: the subcommittee for the appropriations panel, is there any work being done to get an audit of the pentagon? guest: yes, but i do not know specifically how much is done. there will be a lot more oversight. some of the classified information that you cannot talk about publicly is a concern. there is a lot that goes on behind the scene. host: george finishes his column

by writing this. st. louis, missouri, independent line. the last phone call for the congressman. caller: i appreciate your candor on the last question. i want to ask you a question with regard to congressional spending in your salaries. one thing that really bothers me is we always talk about everyone else tied in the -- tying in the belt strings. but you do not hear congress talking about cutting their salaries to help lower the deficit. and the second comment with regard to social security and disability spending -- a lot of times we sit around and talk about the fact that a lot of these people that get disability never actually paid into the system. what are you looking at in terms of trying to streamline that

where you find the people that are getting disability actually contributed in some way, because it is an insult to us working people that people that get a disability but never actually contributed to the program itself? i thank you for your time and candor. guest: congress has bypassed our own cost of living adjustment for a couple of years. we cut our budget this year 5%. we cut it by 9% under one person's leadership. in terms of social security -- and a lot of social programs, we need to help the people that cannot help themselves. a set -- i went to a store at 9:00 tonight. she said i was the waterman. i told her i was a congressman.

she said, this is not my real job. i am working at night part-time, because my husband is disabled. the only way i can get health care is to take on a second job. i was told if i quit my first job and never took the second job, he could qualify for medicaid. the government people told this person how to work of the system. some people have sacrificed, contributed to the system, we need to make sure the system is there for you and it works. i do not have the specifics on a three part program, but it is a very important thing. i promise that i will follow up to find out exactly what we are doing and make sure it is a focus on our special programs. host: thanks for your time.

next we will speak with allyson schwartz. first a news update from c-span radio. >> it is according to the hour. more on the federal budget from this year for paul ryan, chairman of the house budget committee. remarks earlier today on "good morning america. " he said republicans do not want to see a government shutdown occurred if this cannot agree on a short-term spending bill. the gop does not want to rubber- stamp spending policies it opposes. he went on to say that the president's policies -- he punted on the deficit. if republicans ignore the drivers of our adult -- debt, the entitlement program, we are no better than our president. seven veterans who allege they were sexually abused by comments are filing -- several veterans who alleged they were sexually abused by colleagues are filing

a lawsuit today. they say too much authority was given to commanders to determine what happens. and army criminal investigator and an army national guard commander are involved. comment on pending litigation cannot be given. and a new document will only be temporary until democratic rule established in egypt. a legal expert is a member of the outlawed moslem brotherhood. the brotherhood announced that they would form a political party wants freer laws are in place. those are some of the headlines on c-span radio. >> the c-span network provides coverage on politics, public affairs, nonfiction books, and american history. it is all available to you on television, radio, on line, and on social media networking sites. find our content any time on

the c-span video library. we take c-span on the road with our digital box and local content vehicle, bringing our resources to your community. it is washington your way, the c-span network. it is now available in more than 1 million homes. it is paid for by cable, provided as a public service. "washington journal" continues. host: we are with allyson schwartz. here is what the president had to say about the 2012 proposal. -- what paul ryan had to say about the president's 2012 proposal. >> none of the spending caps that were cut are in there. in the metrics that were used that the president gave, are not in this budget. host: the chairman there said

the president punted on leadership. that is a phrase used in the editorial pages this morning. the "washington post" says the same thing. the "washington journal >> says how serious is this budget? the savings are so far off in the out years, that you can barely see them from here. guest: as you know, the president inherited and we are now at a very serious national debt and deficit problem. the problem has taken it very seriously in his proposal. it will take a while to get out of. we are recovering from a recession that was deep and broad. it hurt federal revenues, and a lot of families across america. we have to climb out of this,

and we are. the president has said he will do that. we will work on the debt and deficit. we will bring down the deficit, $1.10 trillion in reductions. that is a big deal. it will bring our deficit to 3% of gdp. there will be spending cuts that are reasonable, that do not heard too many people. the big discussion going ford is how do we do that -- forward is, how do we do that? we are going to be serious about this. what he said about long-term thomas is that we have to do this in a bipartisan way. -- entitlements is that we have to do this in a bipartisan way.

paul ryan talked about bringing costs down. we need to do those long-term entitlement discussions. we need to do that together. in the meantime, the president has said over the next 10 years, we are going to reduce the deficit by $1.10 trillion and stabilize the financial situation in this country. and we will make investments to make sure america is economically competitive going forward. host: by comparison, the debt commission has said you need to reduce the spending by $4.40 trillion over the next 10 years. or $4 trillion over the next 10

years by taking a look entitlements, so security, medicare, medicaid, tax reform. there is concern that the president did not mention so security, medicare, medicaid in this budget proposal. guest: he said we would work in a bipartisan way going forward to reduce those costs. last year, there was a health reform law that would reduce the cost of medicare by $1 trillion over 20 years. that is out there and done. republicans did not focus on that. they decided to repeal the health law, which reduces the cost of medicare. their first action so speaks to the contrary of what paul ryan said.

he has voted to repeal the health law, that reduces the deficit. we want to work in a bipartisan way. many of us believe there is more we should do to bring down the costs. they have not done anything about it, there is no point in going forward. they are the majority in the house, so they have to get serious about it. host: what about bringing the first one out of the date on entitlement reform. here's what one person said. guest: the president has put out

a serious deficit reduction plan in his budget. republicans have not. all they have done said, we are going to talk about this plan and not to do anything going forward. if we want things to get better, we have to work together to bring down the cost of entitlement. we made a good strong step on medicare. we should acknowledge that. we need to move forward to make sure those reforms start working. republicans want to stop those. the president has made it very clear that the only way we can get through this is by not slinging heroes politically, but sitting down and saying, we will

have to come to common ground and find a way to meet our obligations regarding security. in that end, to give-and-take -- guaranteed benefits. find -- if they are serious about working with us to bring down the cost, long term, but protective benefits for so security, medicare -- protect benefits for social security, medicare, bring down the cost, but not to do away with the tremendous benefits provided for americans. host: the house budget committee will look at the proposal. that is in about one hour. what will you -- what do you

want to hear? guest: i want to make very clear the president's proposal, which is bringing down spending. we can do that. $400 billion in spending cuts. i want to hear what the president is doing to grow the economy and make investments, so that we can be competitive in the 21st century economy. the american industry has developed the technology, done the research, been able to create the new products of the future. we need to keep doing that. i want to talk about how we do not just stand still, but deal with the financial reality, which is a tough one for the country, but shift some of those dollars and make the kinds of investments so that we have an educated workforce, a competitive marketplace, and

grow the economy in the future. i think getting the balance right is what this is all about. i agree with the administration. we will get that balance right and to bring down the deficit and have the best for the future and stabilize the financial future of the country. host: we will have live coverage of the house budget committee. will speak about the proposal unveiled yesterday. our first caller. caller: my question is for a non-profit organization. someone donated a painting for $80,000. host: finish your comment.

caller: my husband works for a non-profit organization. someone donated a painting for $80,000. when they sold it, it was worth $7,000. why don't you crack down on that, instead of passing on fuel costs given to the poor? imagine the revenue that could come in. guest: one of the things we need to say is that there is a lot of concern about the cost -- the cuts. the government does provide some subsidies for lower-income such as heating costs. we will have to see if that is a place to cut. it is tough to find places to

cut in the budget, because there is always someone affected. i hope we can make cuts with some of the big oil companies, so that we can help people make ends meet. i think that is what they were talking about before. they also suggested that we reduce the limit on how much someone wealthy could take and the deductions they have for charitable organizations. we were talking about limiting it to 28% for everyone, not more for wealthy people. that is the kind of debate that we have every day. thanks for your comments. host: 12 of tax breaks over 10 years. pentagon budget cut. the a cut for heating

assistance. a 1 billion in grants to large airports would also be cut. independent line. caller: good morning. the democrats have had control up to 2010. guest: we have a republican president and a first term and that is a big difference. it was a negotiated situation. it is true that when president obama became president, the national debt was about $10 trillion. it is now about $14 trillion.

because of the deep recession and some of the problems this nation faced, he wanted to make sure we did not want to go into a worst depression. action was taken in terms of adding some dollars. this has been a tough couple of years. what is important to know is that we are now seeing steady growth in the economy. we don't want to go backwards. we want to continue that steady growth. we are seeing a slight increases in employment. we are seeing increases in gdp. we will grow our way out because of some of the actions that we took. the deficit has grown. it is our responsibility to get serious about this which is why the president, in the proposed budget, is serious about reducing spending.

the republicans have put on the table only spending cuts which is a very narrow part of the budget, 12%. they want to make all the cuts at 12% of the budget. they want to do it mid-year. that is pretty tough. these are indiscriminate and a dramatic cuts. we are committed to reducing the deficit for the president's budget. we want to reduce the national debt by $1.10 trillion. we have to begin to look at tax expenditures and look at the entitlements and would have to grow the economy by making s.portant investments for i host: will house democrats, with our own budget proposal? guest: there will be some debate

about that. we will potentially get behind the president with some changes. i doubt we will take exactly as presented to us. there will be important debates about where we take the spending cuts from. there is consensus on the democratic side that we have to rein in the deficit and we have to make some investments. the contrast between reasonable, targeted spending cuts obverses a willy-nilly, indiscriminate slashing of spending cuts, we are concerned that the proposal by the republicans will hurt the economy and hurt too many american families and reduce the kind of growth we will see from businesses. host: you are referring to the other budget battle here in washington. guest: it talks to our priorities and values.

in the current year, the president's proposal is going forward. it shows the priority dippers between republicans and democrats who want to grow this economy. host: debate kicks off today over the republican proposal that would fund the government for this year . is there an area of compromise between republicans and democrats on cuts that you could make? maybe not $60 billion but the democrats come around to a majority of those cuts? guest: we have to come to some agreement. i don't know where that spot is in terms of any agreement. it is certainly not what the republicans are proposing. they are acting on a promise they have made, a pledge, a political pledged they made to

reduce spending by a certain arbitrary number. in the middle of the year but the government shuts down on march 4 if we don't reach an agreement. this is real. this is the reality of governing. it is different than political rhetoric. republicans can get through this week doing their political rhetoric but that does not get us to responsible way forward to getting through this year. most economists and the budget deficit commission has said not to do anything really dramatic part we are just beginning to see economic recovery. don't slash and burn this budget. i think we should do a continuing resolution. a democrat in to new york, good morning. caller: i have a comment to make. [unintelligible]

republicans need to pick everything the democrats are trying to do. i admire democrats so well. they response to the public. and i believe everything they say. host: let's go to hudson, mass., go ahead, a republican. caller: there was a dollar figure of 100 the billions of dollars that they want to trim from the defense budget. totalercentage of bathe defense budget is that? host: from the 2011 budget? caller: yes, i believe it was. host: congressman kingston was talking about defense cuts were on the table.

this will be debated on the house floor today and that includes cuts this year for the defense department. guest: my understanding is that they did not cut defense effectively. host: here is a list. guest: they are cutting veterans and veterans' benefits. i understand all of their cuts are coming from the non-defense, non-security side. they say it is $100 billion but is really $58 billion from current spending which is at 2010 numbers. compared to 2011, my understanding is that they were not cutting defense. the caller would be right to suggest that defense is a big part of our budget, 20%.

we have to make sure that the defense of the pentagon does everything to be more efficient. we have a smart, modern, agile military. that is important. making sure that we spend where we have to and where we don't and that includes the pentagon. host: as far as the 2012 budget proposal put out by the president, here is some of the biggest increases for agencies. the department transportation is up 77%, the part of education, is up 27%, the biggest decreases come out of the commerce department, about 36.8%, the epa would be down about 12.7% if the proposal is enacted. the department of agriculture also saw about 11.7% decrease. guest: the president has been

very clear that we should outage-educate, out-build, and out-compete with the rest of the world. we have to make sure our young people can go to college and folks that are looking to be retrained and go to college. pell grants are important. in infrastructure, i think that is something that americans agreed that if we are not building roads and bridges and highways and rail systems and making sure there -- that businesses have their infrastructure to move products and people, it means we will fall behind. the cuts are coming from farm subsidies, oil and gas industry, $46 billion. i think exxon is doing quite well and does not need our help. we should put that money into

alternative fuel and energy efficiency. we need to make sure we have energy alternatives. we will not get ahead of the curve internationally if we don't start to make those kind of investments. that is what the president talks about. these are tough battles. the president is pretty clear and correctly so that we have to target spending cuts, not just cut random programs. let's get rid of what does not work and streamline government. there are 20 programs on the same topic and let's see if we can streamline them to make a difference in people's lives and our economic future. host: an independent from michigan, good morning. caller: i am overwhelmed by the gorgeous and is this more mccurtain -- the gorgeousness

this morning. [laughter] do you know your 30-day roll? host: yes. caller: we pay your salary, couldn't you relax that to 20 days? host: what you mean you pay my salary? caller: with taxes and -- how donations.don't take anyhow, i love it when these republicans talk about everything is on the table. everything is on the table when it comes to the middle class, the working poor, the disabled, and people who really can't work record. what about rush limbaugh? the guy makes $38 million per year and that works out to about $18,000 per hour. what about his sacrifice? i am watching you right now on a

mitsubishi tv that i bought in 1986. it was made in this country. it works just as well now as the day i bought it. in the last 10 years, i bought two other television that lasted three years. they were made in china and i had to pay to throw them out because they broke after three years. anybody that buys anything from china -- by the way, i bought a pair of socks made in china and i were the one day and had a hole in them. here is my solution -- wal-mart is going to offer us cheap chinese crap, for lack of a better word, instead of me paying 2 per without, i will take a back to wal-mart and leave it in their parking lot that let them deal with the crap they are peddling to me. thank you, ladies. thanks again for cspan. guest: you speak about americans

buying products from all over the world. you talked about how great america is in terms of our productivity and the skill of our workforce. our products are great. it does not just happen. we are competing with many big companies. they are looking for where they should manufacture those products. democrats are determined to do what we can to make sure that our manufacturing sector is strong in this country and continues to not only employ workers but make the kind of products we want to buy. we want to compete economically. the issues around health-care costs is important to manufacturers but so is our investment in research and development in the new products. this is where we should be, on the cutting edge of technology. we should be producing those products that americans want to

buy. the president's budget does tackle head on us being out front we want to be in research technology in biotech or the energy sector or any of those products we want to manufacture in this country. the budget has moved added hopefully we can make those kind of investments. host: republican line, from tennessee, good morning. caller: it is hard to get in on the show. when you have your screener hanging up on you, it is frustrating. i wish cspan would give me two minutes like they gave that by talking to you. i want to correct you. the democratic party took over congress in 2006 when our problems began and it has always begun that way. they said the democratic party does not get it and you don't

get it today. you are talking out of both sides of your mouth you don't care about these poor people, people working in coal mines and stuff like that. the energy that this country uses, this president is killing us. look what he does with the oil. he put a moratorium on it and we have to buy it from the rest of the world. you are doing nothing for us. we are disgusted and the democratic party is on their way out guest: i'm glad you got your time on the air as well. many of us as democrats understand the frustration in your voice and the concerns you have about how we make sure that people have opportunities to work and support their families and we are supportive of that. we are very serious about the deficit and growing the energy

sector in this country. you mentioned the issue of oil and coal. i come from pennsylvania and we have been producing energy for this country for many decades now. i would like to see us continue to do that. we have opportunities in natural gas and we still have coal and we are moving ahead and all sorts of new energy ideas. we should be able to do all of that. we will continue to use oil. the role of government in the energy sector is to make sure that we have access to the energy we need and we are stable in the way we produce it and we don't overly subsidize the energy sector that is not needed anymore. we should put those dollars where we needed so we have the variety of energy alternatives and options that fuel our economy, our homes, and grow jobs in this country. i believe that we can do that. host: democrat from

pennsylvania, good morning. caller: amen to that. i am one of your supporters. i worked in the community college. i was there when the obama administration helped build a whole new campus in the northeast. it is very lovely and state of the art. it puts people to work. also, in the budget, they are cutting something about wetlands conservation. i don't like that idea. we need our wetlands. it cleans our air and keep our fish alive and is part of the ecosystem. you know all that. in philadelphia, from the ne campus ofccp all the way down the river, there is route 95 and as your driving, you can see these rust belt factories along the water in my dream was to make that a bike path so our

young people could get exercise and the people from the northern parts of the city can get to the south part. that is the first thing i want to say. i also have an idea about how to get more funding. this is a sacred cow idea. we have a lot of churches come m upega-churches that don't pay taxes on their real estate. there is that moscow they are building at ground zero. they are probably not paying any taxes. there are religious organizations sitting on money. the rumor used to be that the catholic church own yankee stadium and the maiden form brassieres and a lot of stuff. they have a lot of investments so why should they not pay something to help us out in this time of need. thank you very much, have a good day. guest: interesting idea. we have always said that tax- exempt organizations are just a

bad. that. they have to comply with all the regulations on about being tax- exempt. many of our nonprofits in philadelphia have a great assets in hospitals and universities and religious institutions. some of them pay taxes, property taxes in particular, and they can make a gift in lieu of those taxes. they recognize that the use a lot of those resources of the city. there is some understanding about how they can contribute. let me thank you very much for your comments about community colleges. we are proud of my district. the president has talked about how great a job community colleges are doing in providing

cost-effective, accessible higher education to so many millions of americans. we are proud of the work they do. for many of us in philadelphia and in cities across the country that have beautiful rivers and many of them have been claimed up, but should be accessible to the people who live nearby and are improving the quality of life by having access to river fronts. there are some federal dollars to build that bike path and greenway along the delaware river. it is beautiful. we have a long ways to go and many of those companies that still employed many people along the north delaware border will continue to be there but are participating actively in the new greenway. it enhances the possibility of bringing new businesses to philadelphia. host: here is tweet ---

east florida, ohio, you are next. host: sorry about that. caller: i want to ask a question about the budget but i want to make a statement. i would like -- that guy from tennessee, he should turn off fox news and turn of the senate and the congress and make -- and wants them make the bills. i would like to ask the people, what has the republican party ever done to pass a bill for any working people in this country. ? i am a veteran. i am an ex-steelworker. i had my job taken away. the mill that i worked in is now in china producing steel. on this federal budget, the cuts that they took, the tax credits that you get from the trade

adjustment act, if you lost a job from traded just meant to foreign imports, are they taking that away? is that going to go away? guest: you make some important points. the trade adjustment assistance is an opportunity for people who have lost their jobs because of shifting trade agreements. they might be losing their jobs to companies overseas. it is an opportunity for workers to be retrained. as a democrat, i support this actively to make sure that our workers have the skills. we want to be able to compete in the global marketplace. that means making sure that we have trade agreements that are

fair for our businesses and workers and provide opportunities. we want to sell our products overseas. that is what trade agreements should do. we also want to make sure our workers now and in the future have the skills they need. the provision has been continued but i don't know if it will in the future. because of the deep and troubling recession we are coming out of, many workers who lost their jobs is a major issue. they lose their health insurance coverage. vacant by their coverage under cobra but that is far too expensive. -- they can buy their coverage under cobra but that is far too expensive. we helped a lot of americans be able to keep their health coverage. with the new health law, many more americans will be able to

get health coverage because they will be able to afford it as we go forward. thank you for your call and thank you for your good work. host: syracuse, new york, republican, go ahead. caller: how are you? with all due respect, i think you live in la-la land. taxing and spending is killing the american people. also the borrowing. if you don't think the republicans have a good idea, get with paul ryan of wisconsin. he has good ideas. you talk about president obama in elevating. the only thing he is doing is outspending the rest of the world. innovation should come from the private sector, not just from government. thank you so much. guest: taxes on american families are apple lowest level

that they have been in decades. the democratic congress working with president obama has lowered taxes for american families to the lowest level in decades. we felt that was important to do and we did and we are committed to continuing those tax cuts for middle-class americans, working americans. we are deeply concerned about the debt and the deficit. in the decade before president hu, came in, we saw an increase -- in the decade before the president came in, we saw an increase, there was a surplus of $10 trillion. we saw a tax cuts that were not paid for and we had to borrow

the money. we have two wars, $1 trillion that is not paid for and expansion of medicare which was not paid for. there are key differences. i hope we find the common ground going forward. american people deserve -- demand us to do that. we are pretty wide apart in ideology. the democrats are serious about cutting spending. we are serious about keeping those taxes low for working americans and for businesses. the president has put it on the table a serious look at corporate taxes so we can reduce the corporate tax rate and get rid of some of those loopholes. the president just put forward a serious plan to reduce the deficit and grow the economy in the private sector. you are right, is the private

sector that innovate. government can be helpful in making sure that we have some of the tax provisions, tax credits for research and development so we can incentive by privaprivate industry to do this. this is important to creating new medications and new medical devices and new puriscures. the private sector does this but government has a role in making sure we incentivize the right behavior. host: some callers say they are middle-class americans and are willing to pay more in taxes to tackle the deficit problem. democrats are committed to keeping taxes low for middle- class americans. in 2013 and beyond, our tax increases for middle-class americans off the table? guest: the president's proposal

says we will maintain the tax cuts for americans below $250,000. americans above $250,000, we will raise them a little bit. that is what we are talking about. this is a great country and we want americans to feel pride and make money. we want to incentivize what we do in this country. making the wealthiest 1% of americans the dollars that we can afford to give away, we will need to get serious about how we balance the tax revenues that come in so we are fair to the middle class, there to businesses to compete, but for the very wealthiest americans and some companies like the oil and gas industry who are getting subsidies they don't need, some of the commodities or farm subsidies, we simply cannot continue to borrow from foreign

nations and grow this debt. host: hudson, fla., an independent, go ahead caller: this country has almost a thousand military bases overseas. everyone of those bases, everything they get either has to be bought locally or shipped from the united states over there. i don't understand why we need all those bases to begin with. what do we need guantanamo for? if we move those people back to the united states, we would still have the same size force and all that stuff that they need to buy, if they need to buy it here from local american people, businesses can the people on the base, when they get paid instead of going to the bars in whatever country they are in, they could be spending

it here. thank you. guest: base closings are always controversial and difficult within this country or overseas. i would say that i believe we have a role both from the military side and also in terms of the role we play to our embassies for the department of state. we have a role in the world. there are dangerous threats against us and making sure that we have our military at the ready around the world is something that protect us. requiring the pentagon to be serious about where we need basis and where we need are people in the kind of weapons we need should be a part of the debate. the president has called on secretary gates to do that and make sure we are spending dollars where we need to and not where we don't. host: let's talk about 2012.

you are part of the recruiting effort for the dccc. the head of the dccc talked to us about your recruiting candidates agree what kind of person are you looking for to run for seats? guest: i am proud to be part of making sure that we have the strongest candidates who can represent their districts and want to work to move this country forward. i had a quick trip recently to seattle in the state of washington we will have one new seat which will be a democratic seat. we want to make sure there is the right candidate there. i was talking to people who are committed. and understand what it takes to run in a tough political environment. they are willing to face the

realities of what we are up against. host: what are democrats up against? guest: we're up against a lot of rhetoric on the other side. we are up against a lot of independent expenditures that can come after you. you need to run a modern campaign and listen to your voters and talk to your voters and raise the dollars that need to be raised. this is about winning back the house if we can. americans have to work in a bipartisan way. we have new republicans that i think our party ideologically rigid. that does not bode well for host: the: thank you for talking to our viewers this morning. we will continue getting your comments and thoughts on the president's 2012 budget proposal and become back. here is a news update from cspan radio. >> numbers just in from the

commerce department show retail sales rising for the seventh month in a row, up zero 0.3% in january due to increased demand at department stores, electronics stores, and automobile dealerships. that increases half of what economists the expected because january was the first month that americans had money in their paychecks because of the social security tax cut. senator john kerry, chairman of the senate foreign relations committee, meets with officials in pakistan to talk about the case of an american being held there after fatally shooting two pakistan eight. raymond allen davis admits to a shooting two men in january. he says the armed men were trying to rob him. the u.s. says the former special forces and soldier should be released. this has become a point of contention between washington and islamabad. u.s. officials have threatened to withhold billions of dollars in aid to get mr. davis freed.

we will learn more today about the 2001 anthrax attacks when the national research council releases its report on the science the fbi used in its investigation of the attacks that killed five people. the fbi sought the independent review because of skepticism about its findings that the late army researcher bruce ivins acted alone in sending the deadly powder in the mail. the fbi concluded that the parent material of the anthrax spores used in 2001 came from a single flask in his laboratory at fort detrick, maryland. the news conference will be available later today on our website, c-span.org. those are some of the latest headline on cspan radio. >> when i was sworn in as president, i pledge to cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term. the budget i am proposing today meets that >> pledge> president obama sent a $3.70 trillion

budget which would reduce the budget by over one trip dollars trillion over the next three years. what reaction from house and senate members online at the cspan video library. it is washington your way. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with your thoughts on the president paused 2012 budget proposal. jack lew will be up before the house budget committee today. we will have live coverage of that hearing on cspan 3. this is "the baltimore sun" --

in the house, republicans have a proposal to keep the government running for this year. they would go until september 30 and that debate kicks off today on the house floor and we have live coverage on c-span. s.i., new york, democratic line, what you think about the 2012 budget proposal? caller: 1 slight comment first on the congresswoman -- on congress meant kingston's act of about the woman who was working two jobs. it reminds me of a woman speaking to president bush said that she had three jobs to get by and he said that as the american way. i wanted to ask the good congress woman from pennsylvania on the budget when she said pennsylvania provides gas and fuel for the economy, would she have touched on the

system of hydro-franking which is poisoning the wells of certain parts of the country? would she have these companies like halliburton come forth with all the ingredients, the chemicals that are poisoning the water in pennsylvania? i have a piece of property in pennsylvania. thank you so much. host: john is a republican in knoxville, tenn., you are next. caller: i have heard nothing about foreign aid. host: and what the plan is? caller: no cuts are being made about foreign aid except for defense cuts. i would like to know what they will do for going out and throwing money at these places and people want to kill us. host: mr. kingston is an

appropriate her from georgia said that foreign aid as part of the package of cuts for this year, 2011. that debate kicks off in the house today on the floor. he said it is part of the conversation. it makes up less than 1% of the total federal budget. what do you make of that? caller: i think it stinks. thatve kids in apalachicola did nothing to eat. bill gates and people like that pearl money overseas. when these people get old enough, they will want to kill us. that is my view. host: we will hear from a democratic caller, what is your view? caller: i would like to see the military cuts, the war's end, and the defense cuts. like the other gentleman that called, i was outraged by the

first representative who was on with the woman in the supermarket. i think congress needs to have all their health insurance cut so they know how the rest of the people feel. he wants her to work two jobs so she can cover her husband reportd. he thought she was cheating the system. i think he is outrageous and it shows the character of the greediness in this country. congress should give up their health care. host: the caller before mentioned the issue of foreign aid. there are two budget battles happening in washington for this year. congress needs to pass a continuing resolution that keeps the government funded through the end of the year, the fiscal year, september, 2011. the president introduced his 2012 budget proposal yesterday. that is the beginning of the process for 2012. it has to go through congress and that will take months to do.

on the issue of spending for this year, here in "the new york times" -- michigan, republican line, good morning. caller: i have a question for the people out there if they really feel they are better off

two years after this administration. this budget truly has some hidden things in it. there is 15 different hacks -- tektites in here. -- tax hike in year. i own think the president is serious about getting this massive deficit under control. i think he has an agenda. we will be looking like venezuela. is a sad state of affairs is all i can say. host: lower louisiana, an independent, go ahead caller: i have been listening to this argument and we are cut to the bone. the argument is improperly framed. we don't have a spending problem, we have a revenue problem. no more terrace in the treasury. second, we have companies that pay no taxes.

excuse me -- the rich at the time ronald reagan came in were at the top 70% rate. they are now at 35% and still grumbling. we spend 3/4 of $1 trillion on defense. bankers stole the rest of our money and put people out of work was lowered the tax. you have less people employed paying taxes. the republican party held down wages for three decades to the point where 40% of the people working now don't make enough to pay taxes. considering all of these and plus the companies like exxonmobil who don't pay any taxes are making a fortune. they are getting subsidies.

my argument would be that we don't have a spending problem. we have a revenue problem. let's stop picking each other apart over the spending cuts. host: on the issue of 2007 spending and what happens with the government if they continued resolution is not passed to keep the government running through september 30 for this year, there would be a government shutdown. this is from the associated press this morning --

he said obama punted when it came to the deficit. he said that if republicans ignore the drivers of our debt which are the entitlement programs, we are no better than the president. that is the associated press reported on chairman paul ryan from wisconsin, house budget committee chairman. pa., go to milford, democratic line, go ahead. caller: this is yvonne. my concern is that i voted for obama and i believe he believes that the school system should get better and the children should be better educated. however, i have a daughter and son-in-law that are both teachers. their jobs are being put on the line because they are letting go of all these teachers. in texas, my daughter in law is

a spanish teacher and her job is being jeopardized because they are letting go of all these teachers. in new york, the same thing. i don't understand. i believe that he wants the children to learn more but how will they do this when all of these states are letting go of some many educators? host: the budget proposal has an increase for the education department. caller: exact , and all the states are losing all these teachers? if he is increasing, how is it all the states are letting go of all the teachers? host: here is an e-mail from a libertarian in arkansas. let's go to a commerce,

michigan, republican line. caller: don't cut me off. the representative from pennsylvania made a mistake by saying that we will control or watch the behavior. what does that tell you where she is coming from? behavior of who? the gentleman that spoke earlier was right. when the house of representatives had the majority, that's when our economy and everything else went downhill. host: independent in georgetown, south carolina, what are your thoughts on the president's 2012 budget proposal? caller: don't think it is enough cuts. i have watched democrats and republicans air their views on this program. it is like rearranging the chairs on the deck of a ship is sinking.

thehey don't get serious, government closing down could be the better thing that happens to us and sent a message to this country that 40 cents of every dollar is being spent here and that is borrowed money and pretty soon we will be working for the folks holding the bonds and not our jobs or our families. host: should tax increases be on the table? caller: i think so. if you look at the amount of revenue that comes from tax increases, it does not begin to solve our problems. they need to get serious about entitlement programs and led to do what needs to be done now before it gets out of hand and we don't have choices. host: tennessee, democratic line, caller: thank you, i think people forget in the eight years that bush and cheney were in there, they write to the united

states -- they raped the united states. there is no white or black man that can re-do what was done in those eight years. it will take 30 or 40 years to climb back out of the mess we are in. anybody that would vote for a republican are cutting their own throats because they are just out for the upper 5-10% of the people and the rest of us had better take care who we put in there. host: sting, texas, what do you think? caller: the health care bill is going at the wrong way. instead of going after the insurance coverage, they need to cut the cost of health care. a four-day hospital stay is $13,000. that is ridiculous. secondly, many of the programs we have out there are being abused by illegal aliens.

they need to cover the borders. that is where a lot of the money needs to go. many of our problems will go away when we start paying social security disability, health care coverage, special programs in schools, it is out of hand. they take our jobs and don't pay taxes and the obama administration is closing their eyes to the needs of the american people, both foreign affairs and in our country. host: one caller mentioned that we have a revenue problem when it comes to the federal budget. this is "the new york post" this morning --

michigan, a democratic line, go ahead. you are on the air. caller: hi, there. host: turn your television down. we will put you on hold and go to california, an independent. thank caller: for taking my call. the previous caller mentioned illegals coming into the country. the taxpayers are taken to the careers because of this. with this illegal emigration to

the united states is costing the taxpayer $346 billion annually. there is 300,000 pregnant mexican women crossing the borders to drop their babies over here so we can have those anchor babies over here? host: are you getting that data? caller: it comes from the internet. read frosty woolridge. it is a website. not mentioning the school system, the prison system, there are so many millions of dollars we are paying for the people in prison, the school system -- go into one of the public assistance offices. they have transmitters for these

people to get medi-cal. if you can speak english, what does that tell you? host: if you want an agency break down for the 2012 was a proposal, go to npr.com and "the washington post" has a breakdown today. let's go to wisconsin, republican line, go ahead. caller: c-span is helping to save our nation, thank god.

we are not going to be able to pay all our bills and support all our entitlements. caller: there have been numerous people who have had cancer or asthma.

he would start taxing people at $50,000 and above and the highest tax level would reach 70%. we are fighting over the crumbs when the wealthy have all this money. host: the president has proposed $43.5 billion budget for the agency. the controversial devices produce full body images of airline passengers and the administration says they contain robust, built in privacy safeguards. the administration includes $273

million for new explosive detection systems at airports. west hills, calif., republican line, you are next. caller: i am sad to hear either republican, democrat, independent, we are all americans and why can't get along? why is it the government talking about cutting people who have worked 40, 50 years on sells securities, 60, 70 years old and cannot work a full-time job and

why are they talking about taking that money that they put in. they had no choice. it is taken out automatically. during puller matches that. why is it that all the sudden that is an entitlement like welfare. it is something you work for. welfare you don't work for. tackle those people first. leave the social security alone or send a statement to people and tell them how much has been taken out from them and how much is supplied by your employer. let them take care of it themselves f you send them the money. host: this is from "the washington post" --

from" the washington times"-- florida, independent line, go ahead. caller: anything can be barred

from ourselves like the greenback dollar with lincoln. we don't have to borrow from the world bank or the imf with interest rates. we can borrow from ourselves at zero interest rates. if you're making $1 million per day, you still keep that percentage of tax bracket. i don't understand why we talk about the tax bracket. it does not make sense and we have to keep improving this country like it was a business. you don't improve the country by cutting health and manufacturing. you bring it back with smart money and you don't do it on borrowed money that you have to pay the interest on. host: iowa, democrats, what do you think? you think?