the ones we are administering, if they are allowed to grow, it can give us hope that we can get to the 40 million that we stand ready to serve. host: your bottom line message to congress is to not cut the funding. -- do not cut the funding. host: dr. gary wiltz, thank you for being on. that is it for the wednesday morning program. we will be back here tomorrow morning at 7:00. hope you will be with us. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> president obama spends part of his day to day visiting wounded service members at bethesda naval hospital. we will hear from the president's spokesman at 12:30 live on c-span. the newly appointed governor of the two nations' central bank will talk about the role of the economy in the wave of unrest sweeping the middle east. the tunisian leader was forced to leave last month following widespread protests. we will also hear about the potential economic impact on the region's economy going for reported. the state department is processing u.s. citizens for folks travelling out of libya. our prime time programming looks like this. we will hear from a couple of members of the u.s. house. we will hear from tennessee democrat jim cooper and ways to improve congress. following that, we will talk

about issues facing an arizona district project gets under way tonight at 8:00 eastern. the heads of the national commission on fiscal responsibility and reform, erskine bowles and alan simpson, spoke recently about what is ahead for congress and the president as they try to enact the deficit reduction plan and what it means to the american economy. they spoke of the national center for policy analysis in dallas and this is about one hour. one of the board members is here today. we want to note that her >> jimmy johnson is also here. we appreciate that. [applause] also seated here upfront is the mayor of the great city of dallas.

keeper coming, sir. [applause] other distinguished guests -- we have several students who are recipients of the sumner foundation scholarships. the schools represented today are smu, texas wesleyan, austin college, the university of dallas, and houston tillotson university. some of these kids tell the long way to be here. we are happy to to have them. several of the ncpa board members are here. thank you all for coming to the event today. [applause] if you are new to these events and even if you aren't, you should have found it permission on the ncpa on your chair. if your support and all the people i have already mentioned, we have been able to promote, and archer, and even found some ideas that have been fundamental to the prosperity of

america. the roth ira and other ideas started at the ncpa. $225 billion in personal savings has been taxed once and will never be taxed again as a result more than 23 million families are now managing some of their own health care dollars and lowering health-care costs in the process by having a health savings account. because of other reforms that started here, half of all future enrollees in 41 k plans will be automatically enrolled with a diversified portfolio that will give them safer and better returns for their retirement and 78 million baby boomers will be able to work beyond their retirement age without being penalized by social security. in this information, you can sign up for daily policy digest and also for the john goodman

healthcare blog. that is the only place where all these good ideas are vetted and debated and discussed. the ncpa organized a collaborative effort that brought together policy experts from many others think tanks. they had a standing-room-only capitol hill briefing moments before the house was going to vote on reforms to the reasons health care law. several of the cable networks covered it. our friends from cspan who are here today covering this yvette also covered that one. if you happened to have missed that one, you want to get anybody from the ncpa and they will tell you how to get a link to that. before you know it, it will be summer -- iknow -- think hard

on that. we will soon get ready for this year's edition of four-start debate. that is a debate camper sponsored by the general tom a french institute -- the general anks institute and we would like to sponsor a student for that. all you have to do is ask eileen or any of the staff and we will give you more information about that. it is an important initiative. erskine bowles and senator alan simpson are cochairs of president obama's national committee on and fiscal responsibility. erskine bowles was a pivotal negotiator in securing the first balanced budget in several decades under president clinton. if you accomplish nothing else, that was a great thing.

senator simpson served from wyoming for more than two decades while he was in the senate. he forced a well-deserved reputation as being a forceful voice for common sense and public policy. his wife anne is with us and we appreciate you being here. our moderator is president of the ncpa, john goodman, the father of health savings accounts. his blog has over 1300 readers every day. we would like for you to be among them. he often appeals and cable network news and his columns appear in several national newspapers and other on-line media. would you please join dr. goodman and all the staff of the ncpa in welcoming dr. erskine bowles and senator alan simpson? [applause] kine bowles. >> even though it is snowing outside, i am happy to give you

>> alan simpson you are a republican and erskine bowles you are a democrat and i have not noticed a single crossword between you. why are you to go so different for everyone in washington? >> when you are associated with someone especially in a time of tension and trauma, you learn about friendship. when we started this, this was a suicide mission and it still is [laughter] erskine bowles said what am i doing here? i said joe biden called. thanks, joe. erskine bowles is the co-chair of the first call i received was from bob and elizabeth dole defeated -- elisabeth defeated erskine bowles in north

carolina i was bob's assistant for 10 years. this is the finest person we have ever known. that is good enough for me. it took us three months to establish that centrust in our commission. -- that same trust and our commission. trust is the coin of the roman politics. it is very tarnished now in washington. once we decided to go off the cliff, finally we said maybe two of us will sign this. [laughter] that kind of irritated the rest of them. then we have 14 reasons for doing this. he has eight grandchildren and i have sex. it is that simple. -- i have six. >> i 0 is feel like we are "the sonny and cher show. you can guess which one i am.

i was one of the world's worst. i walked into a meeting with of elizabeth dole and the press was asking for her autograph and that was not a good sign. [laughter] i have always believed that to get something done you have to have two things. you have to build up trust and you have to have mutual respect. i trust al since then to the bottom of my soul. i respect him like nobody else. he is the father or uncle or older brother everyone wishes we had. the success we had and this commission is directly attributable to him. he has that ability with that great wit and believe me, his mind is just as sharp as his wit. i felt it sometimes. [laughter]

together tog people find common sense solutions to tough problems and that is what we need in this country today. that's what i like him so much. [applause] >> i've got to do something i don't normally do. i will open this up at the end of the session and allow un the audience to ask a few questions of your honor. you might think about what question you would like to ask. i would like to bring everybody in the audience up to speed on where we are. if one of you would tell us what were the marching orders that you got from president obama when he set up this commission? >> this is a numbers guy and i do the color. he can answer [laughter] that] >> he sometimes says his hearing aid was not quite working. [laughter]

the president called as up. he knew who he was getting when he brought us in very don't find two more fiscally conservative people than we are. he knew we were. he knew we were serious about the need to reduce the deficit he said he wanted us to head the commission. he promised that he will give us the support we need. he said he realized that the debt is not sustainable. he understands the fact that we face the most predictable economic crisis in history. he said he will not hold us back. we will come forward with recommendations that we think are right. we will get behind them. that was good enough for me to agree what i found that al was going to be my co-chair. >> i said if i do this, i don't

rahm emanuel running off a cliff. i know him and that is an honest comment. [laughter] i was convinced and i said to him that your health care bill has to be on the table. nothing can be off the table and he said that is fair enough. we said we would tell that to the commission. we had a meeting in the white house. he said we could go through everything including the new bill. we said ok, that's for starters. >> many people in the audience today and in the c-span television audience will be listening to the two of you. they will ask how serious is this problem? what would happen if we don't do anything? >> anyone can understand it. if you spend a buck and borrow

40 cents and don't know where the hell you are going, you must be the stupidest country on earth. does that answer your question? [laughter] 40 cents of every block we spend we borrow. it is not from your friendly uncle charlie. it is from china and private and public people. if anybody can not read the tea leaves with those statistics, in the last few weeks, it went up $200 billion to a debt of $14 trillion $500 billion. that is a disaster. >> i think these deficits are like a cancer. i think they will destroy this country from within. i will give you one simple example. today, we spent 100% of the revenue we take into this country on the mandatory

spending items. that is medicare, medicaid, and social security. that means every single dollar that we spend on national security and the military and fighting these two wars and homeland security, on education, infrastructure, on high-value research, every single dollar is borrowed and half of that is borrowed from foreign countries. that is a formula for disaster. if we do not change that, this country will be a second-rate power before you know it. that is how important what we are talking about is today. >> the other day, harry reid, the leader of the democrats in the senate, was on tv. he said there is no problem with social security and it is fully funded for several decades. on the house side, charlie rangel, who was head of the ways

and means committee, the most important finance committee in the house, before the health care bill passed, he said there is no problem with medicare. it is fully funded for two or three decades. what do you say to that? >> you say so what. [laughter] you also say we are not doing horrible things to social security to balance the budget of the united states on the backs of poor old social security recipients. what we did in our recommendation is we take care of the lowest 20% in society by giving them 125% of poverty level. we have to cough up extra bucks in the system for that. anybody up to 85, we get a 5% bonds, 1% per year. we have a new cost of living index and with a horrible things. we raised the retirement age to

68 by the year 2015. 50. the average life expectancy is 77. my wife is here and i will not go into the words i was thinking of. [laughter] it is right on the tip of my tongue. nobody stole your trust fund. it has a surplus of $2.50 trillion. that is true. that consists of beautiful chunks of paper with a special cast of printing which are called iou's. young people are putting in what i will get two more. there is no locked box. that is a fake. the guy put in yesterday and i get out. in may, not enough cavemen to pay out. this was last may.

the trustees of the system said here is some of the beautiful paper. we need a little cash. they got their cash. why shouldn't they? if we don't want to do anything, when you go up to the window in 200037, you'll get 22% less in your check. that does not seem too smart to that is where we are. do nothing and that is what will happen. that is an irrefutable figure by the trustees of the system and any other person who comments on social security. >> in short, the social security trust -- trust fund is cash-- today. -today. negative today. by law, they will have to reduce benefits by 22%. those are the facts. >> what do you say to people who

pay their payroll taxes? they paid into social security and medicare and they are owed. >> i ask old they are. 79, 80, i and 79. i put in when i was 15 when i worked at the bakery and i was in college and you only pay it all over -- if you earn over $3,000 in the summer. you drink more beer than that in the summer. [laughter] then i went to the army and i paid in social security. you don't in the service now but i did. i practice law for nearly 20 years and never put in over $874 per year and neither did anybody my age. not one single person. employed. that went to $1,200 and $1,500. it went even higher. in 1983, i remember a statistic that if he retired with full

activity in 1983, you get everything back in the first four years of the benefit time + 6% interest. it has to be different now, i am sure. anybody that gives me that soapsuds that i put it from the beginning and i won it all out, with an age 14 years higher than when it was set up, some say we're going to privatize social security. that is not in our package at all. george w. bush tried to present that to the people and they did not go for it. those are for reasons known and unknown. you cannot believe the aarp. we went to their leadership and we ask of anybody is a patriot? or are they just markers? [laughter] they did not like that. [laughter]

erskine bowles grabbed my arm. [laughter] the new guy, rand, is a good egg. the guy who has been there for 35 years just smiles and never says anything. he said we have modest changes that will get fixed up. i asked if it would be on toward for them to share with us. they never did they are a destructive force in trying to do what we are trying to do. 38 million members, a $12 dues, they live in a temple made of marble and wood and will let anybody in. enough of that. [laughter] >> this country has made the big mistake of over-promising.

we made promises that we cannot deliver on. we made promises on social security that you will get x benefit. the social security trust fund will run out of money into thousand 37 and benefits will have to be cut about 22% >> i probably a over-promising more than anything in the world. it is like when i tell my wife i will be home at 8:00 and i get home at 7:30. i am a hero by teller i will be all but 7:00 and i get home at 7:30, i am a dog. i think we have a choice in this country. we can begin to under-promise and over-deliver or we can wreck this country and over-promised the american people and disappoint them day in and day out. i think the american people get it. >> there is such a difference between the scheduled benefit and the payable benefit. that is what he is saying.

by law, when you get to the window and they say this is 22% last, go get it from the fed. the law says that you will not pay any scheduled benefits. you will pay only payable benefits and that is written in. you cannot escape that one. that is the lock box. >> our plan makes it solvent for 75 years and that is the key. >> let me ask about national defense. we are in two wars. we may be in egypt or iran because there is no telling where we will get involved next. what about spending on national defense? >> we put forward a plan that cuts national defence. when you ask admiral mullin what is our greatest national

security problem, he will say the deficits and debt that is accumulating. he says that because it is no different than having a cash flow problem at any business. if you are spending all your cash on these entitlement programs, there will not be any money left to spend it on the military and there will not be any money left to spend on education or infrastructure or high-value research to be competitive in a global economy. that's what the military guys are afraid of. we spend about $16 billion per year on the military budget. we spend about one of its $60 billion on top of that on these two wars. we're spending about $760 billion per year on national defense. we spend more than the next 14 countries combined on national defense. you'll find that one of the

principles we have our budget is we want this country to be safe and secure, but we don't believe that america can afford to be the world's policeman. we have taken a hard look at the defense budget. we have taken it down by about $100 billion per year. that is for the next seven or eight years in order to reduce this deficit. the good thing you will find in our proposal is that we have told you where we will take every one of those dollars from. none of it is easy. a lot of it is painful. a lot of it you would rather not do but we simply cannot afford to continue spending what we are doing on the revenue base we have. >> and the stern of the service workers' union -- andy stern of the service workers' union is

someone we talked to. -fohe was on the council and thy helped reduce the budget. we found a wonderful little statistic. how many contractors do you have? i don't know. we had between 255 billion contractors. we slice 250,000 of them out. no one will miss them. they don't even know where they are. there scattered all over the world. we are saying this is of cert. we're not trying to hurt our position in the world. when we started, erskine mentioned we cannot be the policeman of the world and politically correct people in both parties said it is a bad statement but it is real. this is the first time we have had a war with no tax to support

including the revolution. now we have two wars and no tax to support them specifically. no one in this country has been asked to sacrifice since world war two except our military. that is where we are right now. >> how many military bases do we need overseas? >> right now, we have about 1000 bases in europe and asia. it is hard to believe. we recommend closing about 1/3 of those. we recommended reducing military procurement and cutting out the b-22 osprey and eight f-35 expeditionary fighting vehicle and the light combat vehicle. we were very specific about that. we asked the military on many contractors they had. they said somewhere between one

and 10 million. can you imagine not knowing if you had your own business? we recommended cutting 250,000 of those. we've raised non-combat pay which the president did not do in his budget -- which freezed non-combat pay which the president did not do in his budget. we cut research at the pentagon by about 10%. i'm a great believer in high- value added resellers. we took a back to the ronald reagan levels plus inflation. we tried to make tough decisions that you have to make if you are going to be able to be a competitive country in and knowledge-based global economy.

we have to make choices in this country. we cannot fund everything. a physicist was as what happens when he runs out of money. when we run out of money, we have to start thinking. [laughter] that is the same for our country. we cannot be all things to all people. >> you all produced a good report and delivered it to the white house. the president delivered his state of the union address and i listened carefully. i don't remember hearing the es.'s 'simpson or bowl >> our names are not associate with anything positive. [laughter] he mentions the commission and he made a statement when he said he was going to freeze a minimal

amount. he said this is a very small part of the problem we are in which was heartening. he will go in incremental steps to something near this. his budget will come out. the house budget will be something. the young man who is the house chairman was on our commission, paul ryan. the man who is head of ways and means replacing charlie rangel is dave camp and he is having hearings on this. at the end of this little exercise, i will give you a good note of optimism as to how we have embedded our people in the system. i think things can work to some positive degree. >> i want to take it back. we got ahead of ourselves a little bit. in talk about how we get out of

this problem. the president was talking about these investments in the state of the union. should he have been talking about that in the context of long-term fiscal responsibility? this problem we have is not one we can grow our way out of. you could have double digit growth for the next two decades and not solve this problem. this is not a problem that we can tax our way out of. raising taxes does not do a darned thing to solve the problem. the demographics in this country have changed drastically and people my age are becoming recipients of these entitlement programs. taxing doesn't do a darned thing to control the fact that health care costs are growing at a faster rate than gdp. if you wanted to control this whole thing would just raising taxes, you could do it but it would be crazy. you have to raise the highest

marginal rate to 70%, the corporate rate to 80%, you'd have to raise the dividend rate to 50%. who wants to start or own a business in a country that has that kind of tax structure? nobody. we cannot tax our way out. what we believe as fiscally conservative as we are, we recommended cuts in spending but we don't believe you can solely cut our way out. that doesn't do any good. people want to do it by all costs. they will not touch medicare. they say they will not touch social security. they say they will not touch the fence. we have to pay interest on the debt. if you exclude those things, you have to cut everything else by

75%. that will not happen. what we try to do is come up with a balanced plan that was reasonable and based on six principles which goes your question. the first principle was -- we did not want to do anything that disrupted a fragile economic recovery. you will see in the plan that we don't get back to 2008 levels of spending until 2013. you'll see the house republicans tried to get there in 2012. we did not want to do anything to disrupt the fragile economic recovery. the second thing is we wanted to protect the disadvantaged. that's what we did some things and social security. third, we want to make sure the country was safe and secure. that does not mean we felt you could spend more than the next 14 countries combined. we think that you have to invest in education and infrastructure

and hi-value research. we actually paid for that in our budget. we believe that is important. i spent the last six years as president of the university of north carolina. i have seen the kind of people that are trying to get the tools they need to compete successfully globally. the standards in the u.s. are simply not up to the global standards. in singapore this year, 44 percent of their eighth grader'' score at the most intense level in math and science. less than 2% of our kids to a less than 34% of our kids are even proficient in reading, math, science or writing. 588 graders frederick from high school -- 58 eighth graders graduate from high school.

we cannot compete with china with those numbers. we have to make these changes in a fiscally responsible manner. we want to reform the tax code that is critical. we want to broaden the base and simplify the code. we would like to eliminate the tax expenditures and bring down the right to 8, 14, and 23%. we want the cash to come back to the country. we want to cut but we want to cut spending wherever it is whether it is in the defense budget, the non-defense budget, the tax code or entitlements. that is what we believe you have to do and that is how we got 2 $4 trillion worth of reductions. the president talked about making those investments in the state of the union. what i wish we had heard him say

is those investments have to be made within the context of long- term fiscal responsibility. if you are going to make more investments in one area and you reduce spending, you will have to reduce spending significantly in lots of other areas. we live in a world today of limited resources and that means choices. >> as we sit here today, >> spectacular. [laughter] >> i was impressed. >> i had not heard the full version. >> you had all six points. >> we work harder and that together. >> as we sit here today, give me the odds. what are the odds that something will be done on your package? >> there are four u.s. senators

on this commission who are sitting in the u.s. senate today. they took three hours of debate to discuss this plan. one of them as dick durbin who is a democrat from illinois who is the assistant majority leader of the senate. that was a job i did for 10 years under bob dole. he voted for this plan. the terrible combination of many democrats. at the end of this beautiful remarks in the day of the boat, he said the best thing that happened to him that day was his son called him and said ,". thanks, "" dad." this is about children. the rest of this is battle. bble. then you have warner, the democrat from virginia, a

wonderful young man, and you have chambliss saks bid. those two guys are working the system on this measure. about two weeks ago, 47 u.s. senators met at 8:30 in the morning to talk about this, just this and how to get a lot of it into legislative language and move it. to me, that is an inspiration. harry reid, what ever he has said, you know very well that he would not have ever have allowed dick durbin to vote for this package as his assistant. if dick durbin had come to make and not wanted to vote for it, harry reid has not been on obstruction. in the house, you have the three archconservative, wonderful young man, paul ryan, dave camp, and jeb hensarling.

they did not vote for this package. we went to them an edge to if they were scared arab grover norquist. grover testified for us. he said his ear was ronald reagan i said so was mine. ronald reagan raised taxes 11 times in his head ministration he said i did not like that. i don't care if he liked it or not. why did he do that? he did it to make the country run.

they said we are not frightened of grover. we fear that if you get rid of these tax expenditures, one of the big one is employer deduction of health-care premiums for employees. they fear that the employers will flee to obama care. that is a valid fear. we agreed. i said we have to sort that out. at least they are not cewed by the pressure of the groups. we have supporters out in the world. you have to have compromises but that does not mean you are a wimp. you can compromise an issue without compromising yourself and feel good about yourself. these guys but will put this together.

we have steny hoyer over there. we have the vice-president who has been very helpful. jack lew is now in a position of power. bill daley knows how to make the trains run. our executive director for 10 months, bruised reed is now joe biden's chief of staff. that sounds like inside baseball. that is the way the system works. this is not a government all laws and men and women. it is a government of men and women who know law and will try to help people understand it. that is what it is. >> i am encouraged, myself for the same reasons. getting 47, 48 senators to meet at 8:30 in the morning on a daylight this and you're not raising money, man -- [laughter] you must have something good going. this is a bipartisan group.

it is led by the big six which are chambliss and warner and the rest. that is a real cross section from the left to the right. i think we have a real chance to have this thing introduced in legislative language in the senate. in the house, paul ryan is as smart and quick and facile with numbers as anybody i have ever worked with. in the public or private sector. he has told us that we can expect to see 85% of the recommendations on the spending side that we may end up in his budget. i am encouraged there. dave camp is another terrific guy, the head of ways and means. he fell in love with the zero option which was about the tax code. it was about simplifying the code and eliminating the $1.10 trillion worth of tax expenditures many of which you in this room light. by doing so, we took 92% of the

proceeds down to reduce tax rates. we got the rates down to 8% of $70,000. 14% is the next bracket and 22% was the maximum tax rates that anybody would pay and the top corporate tax rate was 26%. he likes that. we used $1 trillion of the $1.10 trillion to reduce rates and use the other $100 billion per year to reduce the deficit. we want to see some of ago to reduce the deficit. >> if you want to ask a question, there are two microphones in the back. raise your hands. let's go back to health care for a moment. while the biggest problem is dealing with the entitlement programs, congress passes a health care reform bill that

basically says that if health insurance costs more than 9.5% of your income, you don't have to pay it. somebody else pays it. even though we are paying twice that much as a society. is this not another entitlement that was foisted on you while you are trying to deal with the old entitlements? >> thank heaven for what you do in that area and what you try to do by your public forums. i think we did this about 10 years ago. we could not even wrap our arms around health care. this is a monster. i just take two things -- i think it's wonderful to take care of people with pre-existing conditions. i think that is important if you take a person and begin to take care of that pre-existing condition with no expense to that person at the age of 3 and

it might go on to live a fruitful life, that is a tremendous expenditure. the insurance is all messed up. it is so complex, so unbelievably bizarre, it's disneyland, it is the wizard of oz. if you have an illness or accident or something and you pay for it forever. come on, how can you do that? this is the one guerrilla that will eat everything in the cage. i really mean it. we were just puzzled.

i know any way possible how this will work for it i live in the real world of cody, wyoming were a beautiful 91-year-old woman had a heart attack and she is on medicaid and she is supported by her dear family. in 10 days, she had every test known to man and woman in billings and cody. her last 10 days of life cost $350,000. that is the way it is, ladies and gentlemen. the glut of the money is going to people over 70, 80, 90 and with this obama care bill puts it into the stratosphere. >> you cannot imagine how raw

the scab is on health care in washington. approaching the subject was the toughest one we had. my mother said she was proud of may. she thanked me for being fiscally responsible budget did not want to mess with your medicare. [laughter] that is the way many people are. medicare, medicaid, and the chips program consumes about 6% of gdp today and that does not even include the $267 billion you need for repealing the class act. we tried to approach this from a long and short-term viewpoint. we took $433 billion out of medicare and medicaid principally in the short term. we cut those programs.

there was no other way to describe it to reduce the cost of health care. we hoped that would reduce the growth of health care th. we will have to take more drastic steps and we may put a global cap of gdp plus one on all federal health-care costs. you'll have to enforce it by raising the medicare retirement age, block grants for medicare to the states to give them more flexibility, you will have to look at a premium support plan like paul ryan has recommended. that is a defined contribution plan as opposed to a defined benefit plan. the democrats want to look at a

robust public auction, but you will have to take some drastic step or health care will consume the entire budget before you know it. >> one more comment on the health-care issue -- if you keep the medicare fees down a year and everybody else's fees are going off, you'll not find doctors that will see you. i will not find hospitals that will take care of them. >> you are doing god's work. you will have to cut doctors'. you have to have more co- paying, affluence testing. hospitals that keep one set of books instead of two or three to see how much they can get. that is what you do. try that one.

>> merry christmas. [laughter] >> i have sons who are lawyers and they love me and they love their mother but they don't love me as much. [laughter] >> if we don't get unemployment down to 5%, isn't that going to blow a hole in your whole plan? >> when you talk about unemployment, you have to talk about economic growth. our budget is based on x amount of economic growth in the future. if we don't get on employment growth, the revenue will go down. your deficit will be wider. for sure. >> i realize you have to stay respectful of the president. i heard you say that when he gave you your charging orders, he said do your job and whatever

you decide i will back you. you did your job and i have not heard you say that when you got finished, the president stepped up and backed us. what private dialogue has there been between the two of you on the one hand and the president on the other hand about being backed up? what happened to the advocacy that he promised in support of your efforts? >> i think that is a fair question. i had hoped you would see more in the state of the union. dealing with fiscal responsibility. he touched on it and he talked about the need for tax reform and he talked about lowering the corporate rate and he talked about some spending reduction. i think you will see this as a process. i think you'll see more cuts in

the budget that will come out on monday. i think you will see more negotiation as this process goes forward and more cuts come out when the continuing resolution has to be renegotiated by march 4. when the debt ceiling will be breached in april, i think you will see the two sides come together and you will see more of where people are willing to go. this is a process. from the president's viewpoint, my best guess is, what he wants to see is both parties in both houses jumped off the bridge at the same time he does. everyone of the recommendations we have made are pretty darned controversia when looked at by themselves. we are in the witness protection program now. [laughter] >> today, he is having lunch at

the white house with john boehner and cantor and the other gentlemen. this is the first time many of them have been in the white house. this was a staff job that happens. i saw it happen with other presidents. ronald reagan loved to have people at the white house. they like it -- he light comedies or right wingers. -- the light commies or right- wingers. [laughter] sitting with each other at the state of the union, people say that was goofy symbolism. it is not. it is extraordinary you can get shumer sitting next to mccain. during the state of the union use of desperate senators were standing up and cheering like a little kids at a kindergarten party. there were cheering on one side and clapping on the other side.

the american people are disgusted by that. something is happening. something will happen. the debt limit, in my mind, will be it. ben bernanke said the other day he hoped the republicans would not vote against the debt limit just to get spending cuts. their lots of democrats who will be doing the same thing including conrad. he said he will not vote to extend the debt limit unless we get real spending cuts. that is where the hair and eyeballs will lay on the floor, when that comes up. [laughter] >> this is a process. we won't get there overnight. all the guys that are working in the white house now whether it or gene sperling, these guys used to work for me and they are serious about taking this up the path of fiscal reform and responsibility. >> it is a shame that we are in

america now where joe biden is helping us. people might say oh, god, that's terrible. get over that pe. this system cannot work with the kind of hostility. it is disgusting. i see progress on some many fronts a person to person basis. do not throw your dinner roll. bill clinton is very helpful to us in this process. very helpful put that in your notebook. >> solvent americans owe you guy's a great debt of thanks for your hard and unpopular war. thank you very much [applause] i have read your plan pretty carefully and i have read mr. ryan's plant.

everybody is scared to death about this finn recovery we have. there are some of us that think it is more smoke and mirrors than anything. my area of expertise is housing finance. the census said that 11% of american homes were vacant. this matches up with the shadow inventory of reo's on by banks of 7 million houses. we have 8 million american families over 90 days delinquent and entering foreclosure at the rate of 95%. 14% of home mortgages are dealing with in america. these are unheard of numbers. almost 20% of our houses are greater than 25% under water. this is a fragile situation. the chances of a double dip are going up. you guys are proposing plans and so was mr. ryan that move in changes gradually the facts on the ground are that we are on thin ice.

are you working on fannie mae and freddie mac and try to get our government out of the housing finance business? >> that would be a good move. that is what the other commission was dealing with what they crumpled in a partisan chaos. that is too bad. when i was on the floor of the senate, how can these guys be on the public stock exchange? if they go broke, it will not be the shareholders that go broke. it will be the united states. this is stupid. they said that will never happen. merry christmas. you cannot fight stupidity. [laughter] you want to but you cannot. many of these people thought they would get two or three homes and live it up. they did not.

it crushed them. it is a shame. greed is what made america great. i mean that in the sense of the people earned a ton of money like the rockefellers and the mellons and the carnegies. at least they decided to do something with their money and they built the library and every county in wyoming. nowadays, we have people in the higher echelon that take care of themselves first. that just irritates the american public more than you can ever know when they read that the guy's got the money gave the bonuses to a bunch of jerks who tell people if it were not for you, you would really be brought. that is arrogance that is out there. people are fed up with it and tired of it. that is not good. >> short question, short answer, go ahead. >> you talked about simplifying

the tax code and threw out a bunch of percentages. what do you think of a fair tax? is there any chance it can be passed? >> i battle blast. you can't handle this. [laughter] >> we had people come to us and talk about the fair tax. some people talk about the flat tax. we want to keep progressivity in the tax code. we thought that was the right thing to do. we had those percentages. we had a proposal to cap revenue at 21% of gdp. one of your writers said the most it would ever be as 23%. we tried to keep the amount of money the treasury was taking in to a manageable level. that means we have to keep spending at that level.

our proposal was more fair than any other ones we looked at. it was progressive and it did reduce rates. we thought was the right way to go. >> >> and there were tax expenditures. there was no oversight. they are there. nobody touches them. you do not need to touch them. let them roll. 2% of the american public use them. former top income earners pay an average of 16% income tax. jimmy buffett -- warren buffett was right. he said a pay less tax the my secretary. we were stunned to learn these things about where these things go. the average guy has never heard of any of them.

child care, so on. he did not know anything about that. i won't name it things like harry potter, the name that will not be mentioned in the industry. i am from the heart of oil and gas in the country, or in basin -- oregon basin. there are things in there that are not needed anymore. they caused 1 trillion, $100 billion a year. you could not believe what we found. if you carry of everyone of them, including -- give the little guy a break on the home industry. 12.5%, that does help the little guy. not $1 million in interests for two homes.

five. thousand dollars for one home. now you're taking on the national association of realtors. they are across the street from our office. our office had no time. we lived in a cave. we had to its employees and a budget of five under thousand dollars -- $500,000 for the year. they said, you never will get to first base. you're going to get to second base. we never promised anything but moving the ball 5 yards down the field. we have moved it much farther than 5 yards. [applause] >> last question for erskine bowles. the biggest problem for democrats? >> spending. >> what was the question?

>> he asked the biggest problem for democrats. most democrats want to spend money for uncommon programs and they are afraid to cut defense. spending is the biggest barrier problem with the democrats quest last question for alan. the biggest problem for republicans. >> defense. they think we're destroying the safety of our country if we do anything with defense. that is not true at all. >> thank you, john, for being with us. we think, gentlemen, for being with us. [applause] >> that was terrific. >> we will take you live to the white house to hear accounts and reaction to middle east events. that is 12:30 eastern. tim geithner tells bloomberg that the economic recovery has put the world on better footing

to withstand will price increase caused by turmoil in the middle east. the white house briefing at 12:32. the role of the economy and the wave of unrest sweeping the middle east. the leader of tunisia was forced to leave last month following widespread protests. also, economic impact going forward. that is from the carnegie endowment for international peace. we'll have some house members talking about different issues. jim cooper will talk about ways to improve cooper. of a town hallar meeting. >> it is important that the house moves this cr to avoid a government shutdown.

>> we do not want a government shutdown. >> see what was said when the federal government did shut down in 1995, online, at the c-span video library. search, watch, clip, and share. it is washington your way. >> "abraham lincoln" is a unique perspective on mr. lincoln from 56 scholars, journalists, and writers. while supplies last, the posters are offering c-span viewers the hardcover edition for the special price of $5 plus shipping and handling. be sure to use to promote code "lincoln" at check out.

>> the three major leaders of the -- the leaders of the three major irish parties had a debate yesterday. from the dublin, this is courtesy of rte. >> hello and welcome. for the next hour and a half, eamon gilmore, enda kenny, and micheal martin will tell you -- why they are best to

lead ireland. each will deliver an opening statement. even -- micheal martin, please give your opening comment. >> in the last four weeks, i have listened to many people throughout the country. i have been honest about the mistakes of the past and the challenges of the future. i said i was committed to ending the old politics of sound bites and posturing. the leaders at this table disagree about a lot of things. we should be able to agree that the people deserve a real debate. the issues facing our country are too serious for the political gaimes. i'm not going to spend the next 90 minutes promoting a five-

point--i'm not going to pretend they're easy solutions to tough problems. there are no easy solutions. i will talk about health ireland can and will recover. our plan will help us to revive our economy, start -- deliver jobs, and reform our politics and government. i know many people are suffering. the only way to a better future is to take the right decisions and not make things worse by delaying action or politics as usual. i look forward to a real debate about how together we can build a better future for ireland. >> thank you. >> on friday, we will vote in the most important election in our nation's history. i understand your frustration. i feel your anger.

i know your fears -- for your job, for your children's future. i am asking you to vote for the five-point plan to get ireland working. to get our old, hour and ferns, and our children must be protected. we cannot tax our way out of this crisis. we have to have it more cost effective, efficient public service, supporting nurses, doctors, cleaners, teachers, and local authority workers. the reform starts at the very top. we reform the political system and slashed the cost of such a big government for such a small country. i want to assure you that i would be decisive but fair. we have to stop -- i have the commitment, the confidence, and compassion to lead ireland to

recovery. together with my team, tenacity and togetherness on the irish people. together we will turn this around. together, we will overcome this crisis. i truly believe and i know that united, nothing can beat the irish. >> eamon gilmore, please make your opening statement, please. >> good evening. detroit's which you will make on friday will decide the future of our country -- the choice you will make on friday will decide the future of our country. labour has a plan that is fair and sensible. to get the country working, to grow jobs and halt immigration, labour is the party of work. labour is the party of reform.

the next government will need more than just a plan on paper. it will need strong values and good judgment. putting people and families first. it is also about family budgets. labour will make sure no family will lose their home during this crisis. nobody running less than 100,000 euro a year will be paying income tax. the new government will face big governments, so it needs to sound the judgment of labour. ireland is a great country. our best days are ahead. we have to renew our hope and confidence and we will revive our confidence. we have to do that together. labour is the party best placed

to bring us all together as a people, to work together and to overcome this crisis. we can do it. will not fail. on friday, choose labour. let's make a fresh start. >> thank you, eamon gilmore. let's get the debate started. you gave your statements. you all agree that this country is facing challenges it has never faced before. people are frightened. they are looking for a honesty and strangers. enda kenny, are you being straight? and to the hard road that lies ahead. >> yes, i am. the stress tests on the solvency of the banks will not be published until the end of march. our people are not being hammered, disillusioned, and of

lost the feeling that the politics means something to the reality of their lives. that is why the fianna fail party looked at the structures that need to be fixed, looked at how the condition has been left in. we want to get the country working. that means investing in jobs, protecting jobs, and growing our economy, and dealing with our budget and fiscal strategy and changing our health structure. we deliver a more efficient and effective public service for the taxpayers. politics and about leading from the front. >> same question to you. you're offering a different package to what enda kenny is offering. are you being honest with the people? >> i think there's no other way

that this can be done. we have to be straight with people. the incoming government is going mess.e to facemeshe biggest people are -- people have lost jobs. parents are worried about the children. the labour party has put forward a platform. jobs. we cannot cut our way out of this recession. we have to grow jobs, grow the economy, and work our way up. would have to reform the system. we know the political system is not working. we know there are huge changes that have to be made. we have 140 different parties by which we can change step. we have to do things a fairly. people are looking for care and hospital or services for their

children, they want fairness. >> same question to you, micheal martin. you have said that you have done the heavy lifting. what pain lies ahead? is your plan optimistic? >> we are the only party that has laid out in detail a budget plan for the next four years department by department. we have told people where we're going to make savings and where we're going to generate revenue. we believe we must be a resolution in restoring the public financial -- to make sure we get certainty back into the economy. jobs are critical. we have a plant in terms of the recovery. -- we have a plan.

high technology, medical devices. we have a radical political reform program which changes fundamentally the way we do politics in this country. opening up government to people from outside professional politicians to serve. >> on to the issues. we'll discuss the economy. i am going to start off and will alternate with somebody different. we start off with the imf. that is the first thing that you're going to have to deal with. if you want to negotiate a better deal, eamon gilmore, what is your plan? >> it is not going to work. it does three things. believes the average taxpayer completely responsible for the

deaths of the banks. that is not fair. there has to be sharing -- responsible for the debts of the bags. the money is being lent to ireland at a 3% interest premium. that is not fair. there is a straitjacket on any future government in terms of its budgetary strategy. it has been done within three years. it will drive down the economy. it will prevent growth from happening and jobs being created. the european commission has to acknowledge it will cost an extra $5 billion if we attempted to do that within three years. we knew need to insure that the banks -- that the interest rates it is produced and that we're given -- >> in micheal martin, if your

car in gear shifting this bill, what is your strategy? >> anyone can renegotiate this deal is not being honest with the irish people. i did nothing it is the way for labour. what has to happen. the package is a facility to borrow money come to pay off the public servants. our teachers, our nurses, our doctors. that is the first $50 billion. the remainder is the recapitalization of the banks and to ensure the economy works. the heads of state are discussing the enlargement of the fund and potentially changing the interest rates. not for ireland but for every country. that is the factual position. that is not the biggest problem we face. there is an attempt to

camouflage the wider issue -- >> what you'll do -- >> there is a connection between the two. intelligence and diplomacy, working with heads of state. enhancing and improving the framework that europe has created with the issues facing -- >you are wrong. the package was there before ireland -- the interest rates were interest rates -- the set kl = rates were sacked la mt last may. >> what is your plan? >> he was a central number of

the government that could not -- he could not tell the truth about that. the governor of the central bank. in a phone call to inform the irish people that the imf had landed. they had already been to brussels and berlin. photo shoots for their own purposes. as the leader of a major party, i should inform both the president of the commission and responding to an invitation from chancellor merkle, this was a bad deal for ireland and a bad deal for europe. we believe that this deal has to be renegotiated on the basis of the interest rate and on the basis of the cost structure of the banks. this cannot be done bilaterally or by any individual. it has to be done on it european bases with consent of all members. the debate has shifted. i made the point that if the

european central bank required banks appear to sell other assets at fire sale prices, then the policy comes into play. whenever checks are necessary for banks. this will break the irish -- >> can you agree on the tax and trying to get the interest, but if you're out there, what are you looking for profit if to go for 1%, you could save $450 million. >> we do not know the scale of the truth of the chasm. the stress tests would be finessed in ireland by the end of march. they have been conducted in european banks. on a full-scale, european

countries may changed their attitudes in terms of the kind of bailout -- >> you may very well be in government by saturday or sunday. is this the right way to go? >> you have to have objectives. >> does he have objectives? >> i understand he wanted to renegotiate the interest rates. we both understand that has begun on a multinational basis. he wishes to have sharing with bondholders. it has to be done. we have to make space for our policy. onto the deal, ireland is forced to close its budget deficit within a tradition period, to take 10 billion euro out of the irish economy. that will drive down demand and prevent people from being employed. >> if you're going to go into

coalition together, is that negotiable trio and the coalition? >> the election is not being held until friday. there is no platform in the common-sense of any of the parties of the selection. we made the point that -- it has been deemed to be in the current and correct figure by the european commission. knowu extended, i don't where you will get them. it means high interest rates and higher taxes and higher unemployment. elmer period of -- the our people are saying when you have a fix on this, tell us this tragic you have in mind to end this. we do not want to drift and drift and just where people are disillusioned and we would have a situation where ireland could

not pay its way. >> we're coming back in a big way. when you all -- is it your understanding that the deal you're trying to get will involve sudden sharing pool reports use the term spring the bondholder. -- sprint the bondholder -- spurring the bondholder. >> it is pandering to the electric. i did not interrupt you. -- it is pandering to the electorate. at the moment, merkel and nicholas sarkozy are saying -- this is uncertain territory. this is a european-wide banking problems. the plant is to unite -- the

plan is to unite and make sure that the hero comes out of this crisis. that means the should be sharing. it to be well informed and well developed and well planned in terms of how it will be done. i accept that. i think the framework and the fund will change in character and in nature. you put your finger on it earlier when you said that interest rates are on a potential -- in terms of the big challenges facing the irish people. >> the former minister was a member of a government that cannot tell the truth about whether the imf was here or not. that is fundamental to this debate and this political argument. the people to whom i am speaking this evening, they are fed up with the dishonesty of fianna fail. green shoots.

here we are saddled with $100 billion in debt. it is an obscenity that this government's -- the irish taxpayer -- >> you supported -- >> let me finish. >> let him finish. >> fianna fail supported -- we wanted it working banking system which is so important. >> are you going to end -- do you want to burden share. if this no, will you do -- what will you do? >> if the indebtedness is more than we have been led to believe, then from the fine gael

perspective, we would not be putting money into banks unless there is sharing with bond holders. it is an obscenity to the irish taxpayer should have been forced by this government to spend -- >> in terms of banking policies, there will be no change. there will be no change. he has signed off for the fundamentals of a banking policy. >> objection. >> he did support the bank guarantee. >> eamon gilmore, on the bondholders -- >> labour party opposed that. that has resulted in the misfortunes of the banks being tied to the hip of the state. >> stick with the bondholders. >> that is what ultimately the

eu and the imf and the up in the picture. the eu or the imf -- you then did a deal within the space of a week in a herd at a time when there were other countries in the firing line. the deal either with the eu and the imf was a bad deal. it doesn't work for ireland and it does work for the european union. it has to be changed. labour party said that deal was going to have to be changed. your party, your government, mr. cowen said the interest rate could not be changed. >> what about bonds holding? >> it is not fair and to to not sustainable that the irish taxpayer has to bail -- has to bear the full brunt of the decisions that were made.

our european colleagues are already saying that there has to be a burden sharing with bondholders. i heard chancellor merkle said that publicly. we have moved into a space. the issue of burden sharing is already on the table. we have to negotiate the best way in the best interest of the irish people. >> i have made this point before. i have made clear we did have an obligation to insure -- >> they did not stick on the bonds totals. i want to make my point here we had an obligation to the working irish economy that we would protect the banking system. so the modern payment system would still exist. >> it would not have happened if we did not put in the bank

guarantee. there would of been chaos on our economic and daunt workers. that would have been greater than the recession itself. it had to be protected. if not, -- that is not me saying that. these are independent analyst. this is propaganda. we're getting through all of this. >> and also the last point -- >> we all know that bondholders have said -- they're saying that there will be a change. >> the professor said the guarantee should be limited to deposits. >> do not change what he said. >> thank you. people were flabbergasted in europe. the never may find out the reason why this happened.

if we do know that the irish taxpayer is responsible for $100 billion. the collision is the problem. >> no, no. i want to ask the question. i need to move it on. let me ask you, i think a lot of people believe the figures do not add up. one 20 million people are unemployed. we don't have enough money to pay everything we owe back. what you think? is there a possibility that we need to think about that? >> that is precisely why we're in the difficultly that we're in. we do not know the scale of what is out there until these stress

tests are completed. i hear comments from at home another $10 billion or another $15 billion will be required. will not know until the end of march. but you're right. this is all true. our country cannot borrow money. our banks cannot borrow money. we are existing for families. >> i do not believe we will as a country be able to bear the full cost of the banks. it has to be renegotiated. the labour party opposes. >> i did not say that. >> he said -- he read a statement. >> he did not say that.

>> you have given the impression -- no, no. >> you cannot find his report. >> no, no. >> i want to go back -- >> your government made a policy decision. a policy decision that it was systemic. >> there was more than half a dozen -- >> you are interrupting. >> half a dozen branches throughout the country. it was a piggy bank for property developers. >> this question for micheal martin. i am moving on, actually. >> do we know who the bondholders are?

>> we are moving on now. >> nobody heard this exchange because of the interruption from my left and right. i think your point is valid. the irish people are facing -- the reason they are left with the legacy of the fianna fail party, we now will be left with -- having to deal with the spirit we have to have european assistance. this country always paid its way and always wants to pay its way. >> we're going to move on to banking. we'll start with micheal martin. the nightmare that is our banking system and currently has one under $45 billion -- $145 billion --how are we going to pay back the money? >> we need to get the 2 million

banks back into secure footing. white it is very simple. small business community and making sure we have it working becoming. that is the only motivation behind the government and behind -- we have to work with the central bank and with the european commission in terms of getting the bank's rights. the stress tests have been spoken about earlier is under way. we have had a number of stress tests are ready by the regulators and by the governor of the central bank. the key is to restore confidence in the banks. get their reserves up to levels recommended by the european central bank. that is the way out of the situation that the banks are currently an. >> how would you pay off the $145 billion t three?

>> it is a phenomenal amount of debt. of see the bank ireland -- i think it will be necessary to sell -- there are those that want to invest in it and have it as it working bank. i see a future for and knowledge -- we're interested in that. possibilities for the smaller niche banks like silicon valley and investing in the high-tech sector. these are opportunities. will market anything moving unless you grow your own economy. eamon spoke about being export- led. >> i just want to stay with

banks. >> you have to get the country moving. >> $145 billion is such a staggering sum to pay back. can we afford this? >> it is a staggering figure. banks do 0 money to other banks, including the european central banks. we have to restructure the irish banking system. we have to look at money going into the banks and what it is we want to get out of the banks. there are a number of objectives. we have to have won the restored to small and medium-sized businesses so they can create jobs. there has to be a minimum amount of lending. there has to be a strategic investment arm in irish banking. there has been the suggestion of -- along the icc which would

invest into the economy and would provide the money for infrastructure. there has to be a deal. i think this is important. with families and households. there are people who were stretched out and paying their mortgages. one of the understandings we have to have with the banking system is that no family will lose their home during this crisis. whatever happens, repossessions would not be proceeded with when people are making a genuine effort to repay their markets. over time, we restructure the banks. there are new things we need to do with the banks. i also think we have to look airways by which the banks will repay the money -- >> eamon has this investment -- has its program for investment banks. we have enough banks as it is.

that is the problem. that is what i'm talking about, recapitalization and restructuring. do people understand the agony and the heart and the fear that some insult businesses and retailers when they cannot get credit from any bank. i know hundreds proposals from manufacturers and from taking on extra employees who cannot get a red cent from the bank. fine gael proposes to restructure the financing where the state takes a portion of the risk which gives greater flexibility to the banks and businesses can then be freed up to create jobs and grow the economy. this is critical. we're going nowhere unless credit can be extended to small business, the lifeblood of this economy.

>> on the bank's recapitalization, sticking with the amount of money. we are already putting and $45 billion of irish taxpayer money. these are people who have had their minimum wage cut. the could be another $50 billion. if you were to get into government again, how much more money would you actually put into -- this is a specific question in terms of the taxpayer. >> there is nothing new there. i want to make the point that for small businesses, we do need to get the banks back open and running and on a self footing. >> how much money would you put in? about $10alking

million in recapitalization. we're in favor of the elections. there is a contingency fund of $25 billion that is required. the stress tests are not done by the central bank. we have to await the outcome of those stress test. depending on the outcome, we then have to discuss again with the european and central bank -- i don't think you can accept just one individual in one bank -- >> $10 million -- will you put that $10 million in? >> the minister said he did not want to do it because -- the government is still in sichuan -- in situe.

>> he may not an ultimatum. half an hour later, he changed his mind. that is what happened. >> the point i make is this. this is a prudent thing to do until we see the scale of what is emerging from the liquidity tests. we cannot burnt bondholders unless the bank has been considered -- the bank of ireland is still in position to recover. to make its way back to being a proper trading banca. in the context of putting extra money into these banks, the fianna fail party -- it would have to be --

>> i just find it interesting that micheal martin has admitted here that the decision to defer $10 billion in capitalization was because of the election. >> i am forced to attack it. >> the reality is this. the main banks do require a recapitalization. there is no doubt about the upper whoever is in government will have to deliver on that. we do not know the extent of what that recapitalization is or -- until the stress tests are completed until the end of march. i welcome the fact that the payment of the $10 billion was deferred. it allows us some time to engage in the renegotiation of the sharing with bondholders. it allows us to look at the

restructuring of the banks. additional money going into the banks has to be conditional on a number of things being done, address in the extent and addressing the rise of interest rates. one of the main issues i hear is worrying about the interest rates going up. other banks talk about increasing their interest rates. that is a huge worry. pressed to be a quid pro quo on the interest rates. we have to be open and honest with people. >> the bank of ireland would have to be protected and would have to survive. that is the bottom line matter who gets elected. >> he said he would consider whether to recapitalize after the stress tests. it would have to be strengthened

and it would have to be unable to recover in order to bigger things on mortgages and to help businesses. >> we're getting two different messages. you will find that -- they know that is not going to happen. >> we have a clear message. i would like to see the bank of ireland being able to give back to where yesterday of its own volition. that is within reach, i think. aib has some difficulties. we believe it should be sold and continue -- it is a strong bank. >> quick question -- for people watching, these billions just get bigger. this could be doubled. are you happy with the way it is

going? >> i'm not. i believe it is the wrong kind of creation. it should a program at the banks. currently, as we speak, there are people working in banks, hundreds of them, assessing loan evaluations for transfer. it is not open enough. it is not transparent enough. there should be competition between asset management groups for delivering on the portfolios in there. it has to have an injection of competence, transparency. this is going to make tribunals like chicken feed in the next number of years. >> i think we have to stop the problem from getting worse. the labor party opposes that. we thought that was the long way to go, to deal with the distress taxes and the bad

loans. a lot of these loans have been transferred. the next phase, the second tier loans, the small loans, the labour believes that that should not proceed. people are making bigger. the current phase work loans are so-called warehouse's. that should not proceed. we should look out for both. will the do with the sale of the assets? they have taken them at a discount. the next issue is whether or not those assets are then going to be sold back out again at a further loss to the irish tax people. that is the era of the labor party will be focused on. we have been burned once with a discount of the bad loans. we could as taxpayers be burned a second time. in some cases, being sold back out to companies --

>> first of all, they're going to run with it. they are not going to changes. the one concern i have -- and they did a good deal last week with google. we saw the kinds of things they can do. the most important thing is that the taxpayer has to get a return on this. none are predicting a profit. the big warning -- if you read the details of fine gael, they want to outsource the -- to private companies. it is privatizing the profit that should be going to the taxpayer. it is in the small print of your document. what they are doing, taking the

assets. it should not be privatized output to private management companies who make the profit on that. >> we will move on. >> the author said what emerged was not what he had envisioned. this was effectively a secret society. property will not move until there is an ejection, until we know the registrar of loans, until there is movement in the property section that is accountable. >> i wanted to move on. >> it has been accountable. >> we're going to move on to another part of the economy. we're going to move on to public finance. for many people, this is money in their pockets that matters to them. in your manifest, you say you

except that there is a recovery plan. you plan to achieve this on 27% of texaxes. spell it out for people who are wary about next year's budget. what will those taxes big? >> there will be no change in income tax. in tax versus cuts and in a physics, -- and if this is a, for the average family, in the context of labour party having 15% to the few of 14% to 16%, it would be for $200.

we recognize you cannot tax your way out of this recession. you have to keep taxes low. you have to keep the interest rates low. you have to keep confidence moving so unemployment will come down. jobs should be protected. we have put together a program without a property-tax. i will tell you why. all we have done here is to say looked to the parties. we'll give you the responsibility and the authority if you wish after 2014 to consider whether you should introduce a tax on the sale of houses. all parties in respect of their annual charges are going to do an evaluation, whether you're and negative equity, unemployed, living in a mansion, or a poor house. this is based on not having the

property tax. we give the local authorities the option to increase their charges, do nothing -- >> what is your reaction to enda kenny's proposal? >> i think we have to be straight with people. $2.4 billion does not include the additional taxes will go on for the local authority system. the introduction of water charges, the introduction of a graduate charges for young people coming out of college. isabel for part $1 billion. it is about $4.1 billion per it at the end of the date it is the bottom line that matters. it doesn't matter whether it is coming out of your pay package or whether you have to write a check for water charges.

we will not increase at income tax on people earning less than 100,000 euro. we have revenue-raising measures. we will increase in the carbon tax. the elimination of tax expenditures in areas like pension relief for very high and very large pension pots. and the phasing out of the remaining property relief. that comes to just under 3 billion euro. >> in terms of the tax going into a coalition -- >> i am not going to get into any questions as to the braking situations. the election has not been held yet. i know that's his comments -- we do not plan water charges. we would start that is soon as possible as part of our $7

billion investment in water renewables and broadband. irish water would levy a charge for the provision of those leases. >> your chance -- let me bring him and, if that is ok. we'll come back to that. we're coming back to that. micheal martin, you plan to raise $1.5 billion through taxes. >> we have secured about $20 billion of the $30 billion that would be needed. we have taken a tough decision to correct the public finance. we're talking about $6 billion in expenditure cuts. we have spent that in our plan. we have savings in every department. simply're doing is

--ing, we're talking about this has been recommended by every tax group. the frigging plant is neither honest -- it has not been -- the fed begin plan -- the finnegan plan is not on a spirit take 30,000 public servants just like that. they are going to go voluntarily. we're in a period of high unemployment. that is not credible. that is not real. our plan is credible. we have laid out in terms of what we'll do in savings. people picked up on what he said. he said we will not do it nationally. he is putting it all through the local authorities and allowing them to overspend on taxes.

what has happened is when the parties get the permission, they will chop jobs. i have seen it before. the problem from that country is that micheal martin is not have a plan at all, so he is forced to talk about other people's plans. every business in the country, every household in the country has got -- the man at the back gate of the door -- i saw it check with a social charge. >> let's talk solutions. >> he said the irish are taking away from my children. >> finnegan is proposing 100

days of the jobs budget. >> why didn't you tell journalists where you're going to make the savings department by department? why didn't you do the spread sheets like we did? what department of defense believes, what the department of justice police. you avoided that. you refuse to do it. >> let him answer that. >> that is a spoof. >> answer the question. >> let's get out and work. i asked a simple question. >> let him answer the question. >> is not all there. > part of micheal martin's legacy -- >> it is not all there.

it is not there. the details are not there. people one transparency. >> there have been a series of interruptions. >> i'm not interrupting. >> uva said the people get $6.5 billion -- >> let him answer that. >> he proceeded to interrupt. finnegan will produce the jobs bill. we will give them that. we will reduce that apple low- level from 14 1/4 5% -- from 14.5fromto 12%. we will bring in the -- this will deal with the -- they look

for credit. as far as the fine gael party, we should -- we issued instructions to freeze rates. >> eamon gilmore. >> i think we have to be clear with people. these are questions that people want answers to. what will the government do in terms of taxation. the labour party has been clear on this. we spelled out where taxes will be adjusted between now and 2014. there is another side of this equation. it is well to say we will not raising taxes have cuts like cutting child benefits which hits families. or making other cuts which hit people in schools or the health services or so on. you have to look of the cuts

that will be made in terms of the number of people who are employed. the labor party does believe we can reduce the numbers of people who are employed in the public service and we can do that on a voluntary basis. my concern is that they are in government on their own. i believe the public have to have cuts in a far greater degree if they insisted on getting the deficit down by 2014. that would result in additional cuts and additional charges that every worker in this country looking at their pay packets to

january, sees the amount taken out in terms of the universal social charge and additional taxes. you have no credibility. you have imposed excessive taxes on people. you have cut people to the bone. salaries are suffering. they can't afford to suffer anymore. >> you said you are not going to reverse one single tax. you have campaigned against him but you will retain him. [unintelligible] >> that is not a budgetary issue. >> on the universal social charge, we will make changes to that universal social charge because there were people

without who cannot afford it. they are on low incomes. there are pensioners who have been caught in a bad situation. >> me bring you in on the minimum wage. >> it would change a lot. >> did not get an answer to the earlier question. why have you not published your plan? >> we are not going to go back. >> there'll be a higher vat next year. they are not saying what is going to be painful. >> we will come back to that a little bit. >>the fine gael party said we would abolish 145 quangos. we know the duplication that exists. we are to deal with the public

service in terms of its numbers and it costs, i value the work that public servants do. many have come to me and the last number of weeks to show me how to save money. the system has strangled th threeem. the government program is for 12,000 people to leave public service by retired the. everyone understands that. our program is for a further 18,000 for four years beyond that. two weeks before christmas the hsc had 2000 voluntary redundancies. we know there are 1500 offices around the country. a duplicate that kind of work. it is possible, in my view, to have one in 10 over four years reduction. that will give protection to the front line services which are so critical. you have a leaner, more efficient public service which

will protect the public salaries which we said we will not touch. it is not dealt with by the third quarter of this year, the imf and the eu will pull away their support. >> you are talking about taking two teachers out of every school. [unintelligible] >> if you abolish 145quangoes which you failed to do -- >> if you exclude people at the front line you might be talking about one in five. that is a pretty tall order to try to get on a voluntary basis within three or four years. if you cannot get them voluntarily, the question then is are you going to proceed with

compulsory redundancy? if you don't proceed with that, and add the figures in terms of your budget proposal. they don't add up. this is an issue where we may have to sit down and hammer this out after the election. if you don't do it that way, your numbers won't add up. that is where we then have to talk about the period of time within which the deficit is reduced >> will come back to that theme there's a difference between the labor party and fine gael in relation to the deficit. if the growth projections are not as strong as was originally envisaged, the imf/eu deal

allows a one-year extension. our program for fiscal correction is based on 9 billion. if we achieve the growth figures to get to that number -- >> go back to the public sector. >> we will said -- we have said we will honor the public salaries. there are conditions in there as you are well aware about redeployment of staff. our program does not envisage any compulsory redundancies. we believe very strongly that over the four years, we can achieve a 18,000 reduction by voluntary redundancy. >> the big issue here which goes to the part of the lack of credibility of the fine geal party, we are talking about 6.5 billion. >> [unintelligible]

>> abolishing 145 quangoes will not get you 6.5 billion. everything revolves around no income tax. therefore, it is 6.5 billion through waste. >> we set out the department by department where we are going to make the savings. >> there are choices. >> you can save money by waste but i am talking about 6.5 billion. >> let's be honest with people. >> [unintelligible] >> we are talking about 6.5

billion. >> we all understand that there can be efficiencies achieved in our public service. the expert group that looked at the health services estimated that it was about 19% savings that could be made across health services. there are ways in which savings can be made across every state agency. if you give the management of those state agencies the discretion to do the savings. one thing the labor party would do is we would say to state agencies and public service managers that if you can get 2% reduction in your budget each year, over three years, that is a total of 6% and that we would give you discretion as to how you manage the budget. the problem at the moment is you have an over-rigid management system. take the embargo, the recruitment embargo. it was a crude instrument. >> will come back to that

because i am trying to give you equal time. >> we can get to savings but you have to specify where you get there. the event such -- the efficiencies are topmost. if you talk to people, they will tell you very quickly that there can be more savings made and there will have to be other has to be cut as well. we are saying that explicitly in our profile. we laid out there. it is not honest to say that you could come up with a figure like 6.5 billion without saying where you will get it. it is not credible either to say he will take out 40,000 public servants without affecting services. >> we are moving on to jobs. >> you represented the country

for 14 years. you expaccepted no responsibility for not reading his brief. >> that is not true. that is false. >> we will be moving on to jobs. for many people watching tonight, 100,000 may emigrate in the next couple of years. what is the plan to create jobs and is a credible it will work to have been in government for 14 years? >> we are in the worst recession since 1929. this is not just an iris recession. most independent analysts say there has to be an export-led recovery we have looked sector by sector where jobs can be created in this economy.

we have prepared and published a blueprint for the agriculture and food industry. others have signed up to this. can i finish? technology is another key sector of medical devices, pharmaceuticals, did told media, and two -- digital media, and we have a target of 150,000 jobs over the next four years over different sectors. side-by-side is a very extensive program which will be labour- intensive. we will build more schools and concentrate on the modernization of schools and the retrofit program. there of the the designation of water meters. there is a coherent jobs plan there. we did before in this economy which created significant wealth and new jobs and exports last year were up by 7%.

is looking again for this year. >> i have been as what happens to martin? where were these ideas when he was in government over the last 14 years? what the people want to know is if you knock on $1,000, 980 of those people will say jobs is important for dignity, fundamental for the person to have the opportunity to go to work and raise their family, and have a career. we set our five-point plan. jobs is the first function of that than how will you create jobs? >> we will invest 7 billion from the sale of non-strategic state assets to investment program where we create one order thousand jobs over four years in water, broadband, and in renewable energy.

we will abolish the travel tax. the airlines have to measure up. we need to make credit available for small businesses and the changes we make for employers to take away those tech obstacles to employment. -- tax obstacles to employment. you can do these things swiftly. and by decisive action. >> what do you think of the other proposals and you could tell me about your own? >> i met a first-time voter today who told me that she could not remember in her lifetime when fine gael was not in

government. when they took over the government, we were creating 1000 new jobs per week. 1000 people now leaving this country every week. there are a number of ways we have to create jobs. we have to get people back to work in construction. the labor party would get the retrofit program moving. immediately, we would establish a jobs fund from which employers could get relief when they take on new and police. would make changes in retail which is a big area where there has been jobs lost. allowing the down revisions of rent to allow retailers' business to continue. the strategic investment pact would provide relief for small and medium-size businesses who create jobs. we would also concentrate on particular sectors of the economy.

we should remember that we have huge potential for trade with countries like china and india. only 2% of our exports as a country goes to china. this is the fastest growing country in the world. its economy is growing fast and many to be much more up to speed with our trade and and trade missions there. this would be in areas like food and new energy. alternative energy, we know oil will run out power sea area is 10 times our land area. there's a potential for 75,000 jobs in that area. government does not create jobs. it is employers who create jobs. government has to create the environment for creating jobs. >> many people are employed in

small and medium businesses. quite a number of people were talking about they are literally crucified by the banks. i don't want to go back into a banking problem but what would you do, what would you promise to do to get credit to those businesses? people wait in the middle of the night and they literally can't sleep because they are worried and they don't have any money. >> there are different sectors. four different businesses, we have to reduce commercial risk and we have to do development. it will give them breathing space at small businesses and in this country. >> if you want to go back into the banking thing -- it is still an issue in terms of getting credit for small businesses. governments don't create jobs

through a capital program. i have been on trade missions to china. there is support for startup companies and research grants. we need to improve and enhance their management capacity and enhance their marketing capabilities. when i was on trade missions to silicon valley, we brought people out there in technology and they said that small irish companies have the best technology in the world like area of software, diagnostics, and medical devices. the one problem we lack is marketing capability and ambition. we need to support companies. we have developed a strategy to develop export-oriented companies.

we need to do the commercial rate relief. this is about being credible. you cannot raise 7 billion without a fire sale of strategic assets. you will not get 7 billion for non-strategic assets. that makes no sense. it was a public-relations add- on. that is what he said. he did not believe the figures himself. >> what you were not told is that ireland's switched -- slipped 20 points and competitiveness. he has the minister did not implement what he should of done in terms of our competitiveness, fact. 2nd fact, stock brokers have done an evaluation of the sale of non-strategic assets. there are several billion to be had there.

colin mcccarthy has been commissioned by the government and he has a report that was not published. >> which assets would you sell? >> esp power generation. >> that is strategic. >> would sell gas but not the pipeline because that is a strategic asset. it is not true to say that you can't put together a fund of 7 billion -- it would not be sold at fire sale prices. it would be sold at the appropriate time. by 2016, i would like to demonstrate that we're the best

small country in the world to do business. are don't agree that they non-strategic assets. power generation whether by esp or what ever is pretty strategic particularly on an island. that is the first thing for the second thing is that even if it were a good idea to sell these assets, you would not be doing them now when the market is very low. we need to have the resources in order to put into would plummet creation. you cannot tell people who are out of work that we're going to have to wait until the price is right for the sale of esp in order to generate the funds to get them into employment. there are lots of good ideas. the irish exporting is doing well. the food sector is doing well the domestic economy is not doing well. this comes back to the whole

issue of if we take too much money out of the economy in budgetary measures and insist on getting the deficit down to 3% by 2014, too much money will be taken out of the economy, domestic demand will be reduced. walk down any street, you see 50% or 60% reduction >> i want detail and credibility i have asked a number questions and we never got an answer. the most strategic issue facing this country in the next decade as we come through this fiscal recession will be energy. the state needs to keep its lever of control over energy. that means more cash than esp trade. to take that out of the equation would be a huge mistake. >> [unintelligible] >> i am very suspicious of your

proposal. we saw what happened with russia and other states in europe. we see a middle eastern crisis at the moment that is a very serious issue. we need to be extremely careful as to how we go about this. >> [unintelligible] >> there are many people worried about health issues. this is a big subject obviously, you have this health insurance scheme based on the dutch model. it sounds like a good model but how would it work here? we don't have the seven big insurance companies they have in the netherlands. is there arrest it would end up with only a few companies and it would be privatized? >>no, is the answer to that question. martin hsc.

it has been a disaster for many people. they are now getting volumes of phone calls from people about the situation that their families are in every day of the week. sunday night, a woman seven months pregnant, had to lie on the floor in the hospital for 24 hours. that is in 2011. he said he would abolish this 10 years ago. we cannot tinker around the edges. we need to change the system radically. we cannot do this immediately. we to end the two-tier system, theyco-location of private land. in three phases, it will eliminate risk, allow for the situation where money follows the patient and hospitals get

paid for what they do and not for what they think they might do and the third and is- >> i know you don't want to remove a hsc. what would your view of hsc being abolished? it cost a lot of money to start it up. >> we have to concentrate on reforming the system rather than just reforming structures and institutions. it got bogged down for a number of years and then you talk about abolishing a hsc and then you waste time and money set up something else. we have to modify it. we have to reform our health service. we have to base it on universal health insurance and do it to end the two-tier system.

so people get treated on the basis of need rather than money. we have set out a two-phase strategy to do that pretty first base would be to concentrate on primary care. would upgrade the primary care system and by the year four, to have three primary care for everybody as part of ensured system. it would cost 489 million europe. . the second phase is the hospital phase which would take another two years where we would end up with a fully insured system that transforms the health system into a more efficient system, save money, and which will be more fair for patients. >> it sounds like a good idea. would you accept this plan? >> no, it is a crazy idea. it has huge holes in it.

the dutch themselves don't believe in it. a recent study from the university has said there are major flaws with this dutch model d. r. riley acknowledged this on monday he said he would look into. it. five or six days before elections and he will look into it? there are capital reserves that are required for private insurance companies. the hsc block grant across the country will end in three year'' time. in holland, it is costing an average family 5500 per annum. >> [unintelligible]

-- holland att all. >> your minister for help for a time in your responsible for setting a up thehsc. we have ended up with a very expensive health system. we are paying a huge amount of money between taxes and health insurance and what we are paying out of our pockets. it is dysfunctional. we have more people lying on trolleys and not able to get into hospitals this year than ever before. we have ended up with a top- heavy system. >> [unintelligible] >> we are talking about reforming the system and you are in no position -- there is no detail. >> there is detailed. >> he is h set up thesc and he says we need a major restructuring the two-tier

system they say is working well if everybody wants to privatize this health system which took up private lands. let me give you an example. a good friend of mine died recently of cancer. tumors, he could not get a bed in his hospital. they have to drive up to the accident emergency and camp until they are admitted for treatment. that is the legacy of hsc they created. there are many fine people working in this service. they tell me about the millions of waste that is in the system. >> i know there are problems in the health service. equally, thousands of people working in the health service

make it work. more people are getting treated. 1.4 million this year. there's an increase every year and we have transformed the way we deal with cancer in this country. he talks about 14 years and his five-point plan. he wants to lay off another 8000 health-care workers. his plan would take 10 years. >> i'm not sure where he has been for the past 14 years. >> how many more times will you say that? >> they said they have 2000 and they could dohr

the job at 780 people. there was 200 million wasted on the computer system and which never worked. the report was never produced. >> [inaudible] [unintelligible] plan. don't have a there is no credibility. >> [unintelligible] >> [inaudible] >> you have no details. >> what is the cost? >> i told you what the cost is. >> [unintelligible]

[inaudible] [unintelligible] >> we were responsible for some of the best economic years in this country. we have some of the finest people working in health service. we are a country of the --- >> i am moving on from health care. >> 10 years ago, he was supposed to hire 19,000. the responsibility lies with the minister. >> many people ask me about social justice and equality.

they might be things of disability, a gay marriage, children's referendum. they say politicians have dodge did these issues. if you had one key social justice issue that you would pursue if your government, what would be? >> i think would be looking after people with disabilities. that is whatfine gael did with cutting the blind pensions. that was scandalous. the first thing that the labor party would address in terms of getting decent support to people would be the area of disability. as a country, we have to make that a priority. >> i would share that. i also see an absolute priority should be the 300,000 people who suffer from mental illness every year 75,000 attempted suicide and we need to ratchet up the priority for those who have the tragedy of suicide visitor families. >> we did not dodge issues with

disabilities. we as provisions for special needs children in our public schools. they are close to 19,000. >> [unintelligible] >> my passion in life is that every child in this country should have the opportunity to progress and share the equality of opportunity and education. we should always seek ways to improve our education system so of those have that opportunity to progress in life. >> we started at the beginning talking about the position our country was in. this is an election like no other and people are frightened we desperately need strong leadership to give hope and inspire confidence and give people a believe there is a way out. why do you believe you can be

that lead >>? i've got a deep sense of conviction that i know how to fix what is wrong in ireland. i want to give people a sense of direction, copper, and security. -- comfort and security. what i want to do is to be able to say i will carry on the heritage of those who lived and died. on the centenary of that year, when saidim statef home and we are investing in jobs and education and we have the best small country in west to do business. it is the best small country to raise a family in the best small country to grow old with a sense of dignity and respect >> same question? >> we require honesty in terms of the issues we put before the people.

another fundamental aspect of leadership is the capacity to be radical and take -- and make decisions to reflect where we are part of winnie to fundamentally change the way we do politics in this country and by people outside the political arena to serve in government. we need to change our electorate system. we need to enhance and strengthen the role of parliament. i have embraced radical decisions all my life. i would do so again as leader of this country. i would unify people as well we should not be targeting special interest groups. we should build consensus in terms of the future of this country. we need to rebuild and recover our society and our economy which we will do and can do. >> in terms of leadership, what would you offer? that would be different? >> the first is around values.

the labor party values are centered on the idea of fairness. we are all equal. we should be treated in an equal and a fair way. whatever decisions we have to make government about budgets or health service or anything else, it should be done fairly. the second issue is good judgment. there will be moments in government, whatever government is in place, where there will be a crisis in your judgment will be tested. labor was the party that stood by taxpayers. i think this country will succeed. yes, we're going through a difficult time right now. we can come through it. we have to pull together as a people very have to work together and i believe the labor party is best placed to provide that leadership and bring people together. >> thank you all very much. we'll know more by the weekend.

best of luck to all three of you. thank you very much for watching. for now, thank you all very much for watching and we are back tomorrow night for another special show at 9:35. good night and take care. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> that debate was courtesy of our r and'ste. a live look at the briefing room at the white house. we are waiting to hear from j kearney --jay carney. the obama administration says it will no longer defend the

constitutionality of a ruling on same-sex marriage. president obama has concluded that the administration can a longer defend the federal law that defines marriage is only between a man and woman. the justice department had defended the defense of marriage act in court up until now. we're likely to hear more about the fromjay carney. that will get under way in momentarily but until then, "washington journal." [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> "washington journal" continues. host: let me introduce you to our final test, dr. gary wiltz. -- final guest. thank you for being here. what our community health centers and how long have they been around? guest: community health centers are non-profit community board

that are serving areas of their country that are medically underserved. that is the first criteria that the areas we're located have to be medically underserved. the key element is that we are controlled by a board of directors that have to be 51% consumers, which is unique, but a very good way the consumers control the product that we put out there. host: that is a national standard? guest: that is a national standard that dates back to 1965. we provide primary preventive health care, comprehensive in nature, and we are open to all, which is a unique feature also. everyone that comes in, we break their ability to pay by means testing and proof of income. so when someone presents themselves, they provide proof of income, and we adjust their pay according to a sliding fee

scale. host: how many health-care officials are there? guest: we have 8000 locations. millionerving over 21 billio right now. we take care of the uninsured population that we serve. the current statistics regarding the breakdown right now are 38% of the people we're treating are uninsured. 37% have medicaid. 37% have medicare. 13% private insurance. 3% have other means. the grant we receive, that is not counting care, because we have income, but helps subsidize the care for the uninsured we treat. host: all but 15% comes from the public sector? guest: that is correct. host: what about the future of

the new health-care law? guest: community health care centers were created in 1965 in an attempt -- under lbj in the war against poverty. we recognize way back then that there was a tremendous need in this country, particularly in rural areas of underserved populations. it started with humble and meager funding, and we have grown. we have enjoyed bipartisan support historically. before i get to with the obama administration has done, i want to make sure that the bush administration invested heavily in community health centers and we doubled the number of people we serve from 8 million to 16 million. in the president's budget he is made community health care centers when a key component of health care reform. we have the largest network of primary care providers in the country. under his plan we were set to go from over 19 million to over 40

million in the next five years. by every means you can test us, we have been proven to be cost efficient, deliver primary comprehensive preventable care in the course of competent, very fast pace setting. guest: we are serving right now over 21 million folks. host: from federal and public other sources are about what? guest: about 25% of the total operating budget, but more recently ended a stimulus package we will create an additional 127 centers and serve an additional 3 million people. that is why today's cuts are so critical, because of the do occur, the gains we have just made are at risk. we have now added that many more people to serve, 3.3 million

people. one of the first things i learned in medical school was [inaudible] 70% of the new people we are treating are uninsured. host: what is the total federal contribution to health centers on an annual basis? guest: right now over $2 billion. host: 4 viewers if you would like to ask questions about community health centers. -- for viewers, if you would like to ask questions about community health centers. we would like to hear your questions or comments about that. in the continuing resolution, how to community health centers there? guest: it would be devastating to us. the gains we have been able to make, the 127 new sites -- in

particular, we opened a new center and hired an additional 10 staff folks. if this cut is enacted, we will have to close the doors, and this is that the worst possible time. if you are looking for a model care that has been proven to be cost effective, we have saved the system a tremendous amount of money over time, particularly in the medicaid csector. when you look at any entity in all the studies that have been done, we save the system money. host: how to save the system money? -- how do you say that the system money? guest: people go to us instead of the emergency system. the emergency system is the most expensive you can get. we can save them because they do

not present later with a disease that is a dance. advanced.t is host: specifically what are republicans suggesting? guest: there is a trust fund. the billion dollars is set aside, and we have the continuing resolution, the yearly fiscal funding that they are looking to cut $1 billion from. the gains we have made with that billion dollars, it did take that away, that will undercut what we have already put into place, so it will affect all of the new access points and the increase of demand for services that we have been able to enact. host: i have a chart that you brought with you that shows how health care center patients are estimated to grow under the health-care law, but if the republicans are successful, what would happen to the 40 million people number? guest: there is no way we can

reach it. as a matter of fact, we would probably slide back, because the 3.3 million that we have increased over the last few years would be at risk. host: really impressive growth when you look at it. 2003 just serving 12.4 million patients, all the way up to current data with 40 million. really and about 12 years. -- all the way up to the current year with 19.4. guest: we have a proven track record. this was during the bush years that we will ever to double the number of people search. we have been the safety net. there is a lot of talk about patient centers, but we have been that historically center for 25 years. we stand ready. we are very confident we can meet these numbers.

this is something we developed, the national association. we did a strategic plan that showed we can accomplish the plan given the funding. we can actually accomplish what we have said. host: of you were -- a viewer on twitter rights to know how much you are saving the country? guest: on the medicaid system alone we're saving over $6 billion. the cost that is put in their that is the primary preventive care that we talked about, early detection, and the number of people we have prevented -- say diabetics for instance that did not go blind because the diabetes was under control. they did not have strokes and heart attacks because it was under control. all of those things factored into that. there have been many studies that showed everywhere where

community health care centers are located, there has been a decrease in mortality for the population we serve. host: republican on the line. go ahead, please. caller: i believe our health- care system is broke and out of control. host: any more about that, leonard? caller: yes, my father-in-law went in for a gall bladder surgery one month ago, and it was a 40 minute surgery and cost $41,000. the government needs to regulate the hospital's pay and pharmaceutical's pay. host: do you agree that the system is out of control? guest: i believe the system is in need of continued reform. he just mentioned the hospital stay, and our goal is to keep people out of the hospital

system. that is what community health centers are so vital and important as a cornerstone. we are a large part of the solution. i say this because if you can get in for primary preventive care early on, you can prevent a lot of diseases that prevent later on. if you have a cost-effective quality model that is competent and shown the savings that we have had, why would you not want to invest in a program that has been successful? that is really the main point i want to make today. we're not making this up. we have proven statistics to bear what we say. tell you about our guest. he is a native new orleanean. your clinic is something that you join or started in 1982.

100 miles west of new orleans. tell me your story. guest: i grew up in orleans. i was born in the charity hospital system. i attended tulane medical school. >> we will take you live to the white house. jay carney is starting the briefing. good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. before we get started with questions, let me make a couple of announcements. later this afternoon, the president is scheduled to call prime minister key of new zealand and reiterate our nation's commitment to the recovery efforts in the aftermath of the recent earthquake there. i wanted to run through a few economic announcements. you should have all received a release listing the members of

the president's council on jobs and competitiveness. the first meeting of the new council take place tomorrow at the white house at 1:45 p.m. the meeting will be live- streamed. austin ghouls the will hold a conference call today at 3:00 p.m. to discuss the economic report of the president which will be released later this afternoon. during that call, he will announce the president's intent to nominate carl shapiro to be a new member of the council of economic advisers. with that, i will take your questions. how the president's commission has evolves? d? >> s. yes.

the president's position has has beenarriage consistent. he says it is unfair. the distinction was announced today which was brought on by a court-imposed deadline by the second circuit that required a decision by the administration about whether or not this case should require heightened scrutiny, heightened the constitutional review. unlike the other cases in other circuits, there was no foundation or precedent upon which the foundation could defend the marriage act, therefore it had to make a positive assertion about the constitutionality. the attorney general recommended the higher level of scrutiny be applied under the higher level of scrutiny,

recommended it be viewed as unconstitutional. the president reviewed that recommendation and concurred. therefore, because of the court- imposed deadline and the necessity that this decision be made, the announcement was made them is the president saying >> is the president saying that maris does not have to be between a man and woman? >> the president's personal view on same-sex marriage, you have heard him discuss. as recently as the press conference at the end of last year. that is distinct from this legal decision. he and the attorney general or under a court-imposed general to make -- court-imposed deadline to make a decision and they did. the decision is that the administration will not defend

the defense of marriage act in the second circuit. furthermore, the president directed the attorney general not to defend because of the decision that it is not a constitutional in any other circuit or in any other case. let me also make clear that the united states government will still be a party to those cases. order to allow those cases to proceed so that the courts can make a final determination about the constitutionality. it is also so that other interested parties can take up the defense of the defense of marriage active they so wish. it may be congress are members of congress who want to proceed and defend blood in these cases. the administration will do -- defendable in these cases. the administration will do -- defend the law in these cases. it is important to note that

the defenseorcement of of marriage act will continue. >> his own personal position is he baldly. where is his position on gay marriage at this point? >> i would refer you to his recent statements on that. he is grappling with the issue. i want to make the distinction between his personal views which he has discussed and the legal issue, the legal decision that was made today. >> on libya, the president's reaction has been fairly muted and low-key. could you explain that? when the egypt unrest was occurring, he made several public statements. does he plan to make any public statements on libya? >> the president strongly

condemned on friday the violence and bloodshed perpetrated by the libyan government and libya. has secretary of state as you strongly condemned what is happening in libya. the president will be meeting with secretary clinton, their regular meeting, this afternoon. we will have some announcements out of that meeting. the president will address this issue either later this afternoon or tomorrow. you will hear from the president relatively soon on libya. let me step back and make the point that this administration is very strongly condemning what is happening in libya. the violence is of lawrence. abhorrence. it is completely unacceptable. the administration has made it clear both after the statements of the president and secretary

of state and also through our work closely with the united nations security council. we made strong statements which i am sure you have all read. we will continue to work with you and in reviewing various options for action that can be taken to compel libya to stop an end this terrible bloodshed. a lot of options are under review, sanctions and other options. i want to make clear that our thoughts and prayers are with the families of the victims in libya. we are also focused on the safety of american citizens who are in libya. that is a very high priority for this administration. we are making sure that those americans are able to be evacuated. >> can you articulate a policy that the obama administration has for the sweeping wave of

protests that are breaking out in north africa and middle eastern countries? nobody could have predicted that all this would happen. the president has been articulate the need for democracy. is there a plan in place? >> there is a policy. we have been clear about this. what is important about this policy is that it does apply to every country in the region. first of all, violence against peaceful protesters is unacceptable. the universal rights of the citizens, the people of these countries, must be respected, the right to peaceful assembly, the right to free speech, the right to access information.

the need for reform is paramount. these are principles that the president has enunciated when he has talked about every country in the region that has experienced under arrest. >> that's not necessarily a policy for what to do in this country and what to do in that country. egypt is a fungus in military and libya has a complete vacuum, a lack of infrastructure. is there a policy for steps that the country will take given on rest in various countries? >> the principles guide the policy. you are right to know that each country is different. every country is different, every country has a different tradition and institutions. and they have a different relationship with united states. relationship with united states.