the mistic cords of memory stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and headstone all over this broad land will yet swell the course of the union when again touched as surely they will be by the better angels of our nature. [applause] host: the words of abraham lincoln as delivered by actor sam watterson yesterday. this year marking the 150th anniversary of his swearing in of our 16th president.

the entire programming as always available on our website at c-span.org. tomorrow a look at governors and the white house and a showdown. also a conversation with nancy gallagher, the board chair of the national organization for marriage. and brian walton with human rights campaign to talk about the issue of gay marriage and the decision by the obama administration on the domestic marriage act. that's tomorrow morning. some of the topics on "washington journal" heard here on c-span and c-span radio. enjoy the rest of your weekend and hope you have a great week ahead. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> welcome to "news makers." we have a budget and appropriations reportser with the national journal. julie has the first question. >> hi, mr. chairman. good to be with you. i wanted to ask the vice president, vice president biden, went to the hill to jump start talks on how to fund the government through the end of the year, just backed by president obama. you were in that meeting. i wonder, did you expect to be invited? does that tell you anything about the pace or the tenor of the negotiations going on right now? >> well, i'm glad the president is involved, finally. i think it is helpful to have vice president on the hill. his old stomping grounds, meeting with leadership. this was an elected membership on the part of the house and senate.

and i'm glad they are at it. >> so do you think that they are likely to make much progress in merging the divide between house republicans who have asked for a $61 billion worth of cuts from this year's budget and democrats who have said that they want a freeze for this year's budget or maybe $10 million under that? >> that's just it. we don't know what the senate has in mind. i believe in regular order. we have passed our bill. it is up to the senate to pass a bill, and they will go to congress and work out the differences. that's the way we do business. the senate hasn't acted. we don't know what they have in mind. for the moment, the only thing on the floor is the house-passed bill.

>> they discussed about cutting $6.5 billion. if you split the difference, your $60 billion and his, that would put you roughly at your initial $35 mill bill by a year -- $35 billion. do you think that would pass the house? >> no, i don't think so. two, what they have put out is one thing. what they can pass and put on the conference table is another thing. i want to see what they put on the conference table. i don't think it will be what they say they are trying to do. >> mr. chairman, what about what you as house republican can pass? as you know, there are some of your members that want to have more cuts than $61 billion and now in a negotiation with democrats, that number is likely to have to come down. do you believe you can get a bill off the floor that has less than that level of cuts? if not, what is this negotiation going to really accomplish?

>> again, i want to see what the senate actually passes. i think they heard what we heard on election day. that is, cut spending, reduce the deficit, because it is out of control, cut the spending, because you have been on a spending spree the last two years. people don't realize that over the last two years, the democrats have spent 24% more if you include stimulus and tarp money. they have increased 84%. that's unsustainable. i think the government has said, cut it out. that's what the house as responded to, and i think the senators will respond to the same message.

>> do you think there could be some wiggle room on the policy riders? do you think that information could be fruitful? >> again, we'll see what the senate offers. we don't know what they have in mind. >> it is unlikely congressional democrats would go along with a bill that defunded health care or defunded e.p.a. regulations that have been a big priority for the president. i wonder given that some of those things were not in your underlying bill, they were added to the bill before it was approved by the house, whether you think that some of those things are able to be stripped off in negotiation. i know a lot of your colleagues have said they won't vote for another continuing resolution that doesn't have those kinds of policy provide -- provisos in it. >> whether or not repealing obama care is funding, whether that was to be in the base bill or added on the floor was discussed beforehand and we

decided to leave it out of the base bill so it could be added on the floor. that was a calculated decision. we'll have to see what the senate says in their bill, if they ever can pass one. i would remind everyone, that the 20 fwelf bills are being passed now. in fact, we had hearings all this week with the different committees discussing the funding they would seek in their 2012 requests. so obama care will be a subject of conversation all this year in the 2012 bills as well as the 2011 continuing resolution. >> what about the planned parenthood funding? how important is it for house republicans inform have federal funding barred from abortions

and barring federal funding for planned parenthood? >> obviously it is very important. the bill we passed i think was very adequate in all of those measures. >> mr. chairman, what is your relationship with the freshman and the teaparty wing? you were forced to change your proposal? how did that make you feel? also, did you think that a $100 million cut was impursuedent? is that why you didn't do that initially? >> well, there was a misunderstanding i think on what the plans that we ran this on in november actually said. it actually said we would cut $100 million this year. some of our caucus thought that meant this calendar year, which would take us into partly 2012 spending. some thought it meant only in the 2011 fiscal year.

so that was the difference in interpretation. the freshmen believed, and they ran on the promise that they would do that in this fiscal year. so we had a conference. those different interpretations were discussions. it was concluded by leadership and the conference that we would do it in this fiscal year. so we went back to the drawing boards on the appropriations committee and we came up with those numbers to cut the $100 billion off the current fiscal year. >> what did that tell you about your conference about what is possible with your conference the way it is currently constituted this year in terms of how you need to be putting together spending bills in the future, and how would you apply this to this negotiation that's going on right now?

>> well, you know, we have 87 freshman republicans in the house, a very, very impressive group of young men and women. they ran campaigns that were focused on the deficit by and large. so there's is the freshest view point in the congress and i think we should listen and are listening to all the members of the congress, including the new freshmen members. a number of them, as you know, were put on the appropriations committee, and all of the other important committees of the house. so we are listening to these newest carriers of the public message in the house. >> won't that make it extremely difficult to compromise with democrats on spending issues, like the one in front of you now? >> i think the freshmen, especially, are very adamant in

their views and admirably so. they don't have a lot of give in their opinions about deficit spending. but neither do i. we all agree we have to stop spending and stop this spending spree that is sending our nation into a fiscal crisis. the deficit is adding to a debt that will exceed $14 trillion. which is unsustainable. we have never been here before. this hole that we have dug ourselves into is going to be difficult to get out. but the old saying goes, if you want to escape from a hole that you've been digging, stop digging. begin to climb out.

that's what we're doing. the freshmen see that perhaps more clearly than any of the rest of us. >> your theory includes cuts to a lot of favored programs, and some republicans and governors and mayors have pleaded with you not to cut things like the community development block grant, the cdbg that helps local communities on day-to-day governance issues, and how do you answer to those people that need those funds to do day-to-day governance? >> well, we spared no sacred idols. practically everything was touched. i think we have to prove we are sharing the sacrifice. everyone is pitching into the problem that we have. so these cuts are wide. they are deep, but they are wide. including the items you mentioned.

i know the states are having their dullies as well. but the federal government cannot be the backer for the states. we simply don't have that luxury. i would point out to the governorers and everyone else, we're broke. we have to fix this problem, and everyone has to be a part of the sacrifice. >> where in your district are these cuts hitting you the most? what cuts are hitting your district the cost? >> well, if they are enacted into law, which they are not yet, my district would be hurt almost as bad as anybody in the country. i have the second poorest district in america. most all of the programs that we are cutting are in my district, and my people are having to sacrifice probably more unanimous practically anyone else.

but you know what? they are willing. they know the fiscal hole we are in, and it is a crisis, and they are willing to sacrifice their part. that's admirable. these people are patriotic, they are self-sacrificing, and they are able to do their share. i'm proud of them for that. >> we probably have about 10 minutes left here. i'm wondering if you can go back and walk through viewers, what happens, do you walk through, if you pass the two-week extension, what will happen, at least on the house side if you do not come to an agreement? >> well, my goal, and i think the republicans' goal in the house is to not have a government shutdown. that's our overriding goal. we understand how important the government is to the congress

and the nation. so we are determined not to have a shutdown. as long as the leaders are negotiating with the white house, trying to reach an agreement on the balance of the year on appropriations committee, we will be a part of that conversation, but also we will attempt to pass another continuing resolution to give the senate times zsh time to act -- senate time to act and the negotiators time. >> isn't passing increment yat difficult to fish in under those short-term bills? >> yeah, it is terrible. you know, we were handed this problem by the democrats as they left the house in january. they have not passed a single appropriations bill all year long. they passed a continuing resolution until march 4. we took over in january. there lay the problem that they left us. no spending bills past.

waiting on march 4 to come. trying to put together a way to fund the government for the balance of the year with no coorpgs on their part. and yes, it is a terrible way to do business. i want to get 2011 out of the way as quickly as we can because we're already doing hearings now on 2012 budget requests and i want to do all of those 12 requests by august in regular order and in open rules on the floor to get back to the old-fashioned way of legislating . the 2011 fracas is a distraction. >> mr. rogers, you were in congress in the 1990's, the last time there was a government shutdown. i heard you say you want to avoid that at all costs. some members of your caucus have said a shutdown might be necessary to get people to sit up and take notice and

appreciate the importance of cuts and doing everything congress can to reign in the deficit. might a shutdown be needed to force the public to be engaged in a discussion about what hap needs to happen on the federal level of spending? >> no, i don't think so. i don't think we need a shutdown. i am adamantly opposed to that. we're going to try our best to keep the government open and running for the benefit of our people. the number one goal in all of this is jobs. the congress is finally grappling with the deficit. i think that would do to restore confidence in the business community where the jobs are created than anything else we can do. i think it would be a confidence builder to get the government

cut spending dramatically. i think it would be a big assistance to the business community. nub number two, all this that we're borrowing, the money private enterprise would be borrowing to extend their business and hire people if they had the confidence that the government is finally doing its job. >> does that mean you would be open to a full six-week extension? >> we'll see how they are performing, what they say they need in time, and we'll make that decision next week.

>> mr. chairman, you mentioned the fy-12 bills. do you have a cut you have in mind? what's the target for fy-12? >> well, we'll see what the budget committee comes up with. you know, under our laws and procedures, it is up to the budget procedure in the house to come up with a number that we'll be spending. of course we'll take that big number they give to us and divide it up among the 12 subcommittees and go about appropriating the different segments of the government based on that big number. >> you expect that number to continue? >> yes. >> i noticed on the hill there were a group of parkinson

sufferers that came to lobby congress. >> you know, every dollar the government appropriates has a constituency. and will be groups and individuals that do not like what we're cutting. but i think if they see cuts are equal, fair, and jewishly responsible, i -- and judicially responsible, i think that's what they would like. if they are reduced below last year's level, those were thoughtfully crafted so as to have no effect on bio-medical research. the bill enshures new awards are

maintained. we think those cuts are judiciously made. >> do you think cuts could come back and harm republicans athe polls in 2012? is that a concern of yours? >> i don't think that's the way it is going to pan out. the public told us in the election cut spending, get the deficit under control, because that means jobs for our people and a better economy is a better way of life and to save our kids and grand kids from this huge debt that we're piling on top of them. i think if we focus on that overarching goal and ambition and need, i think people are going to realize that their sacrifice, as long as others are sacrificing somewhat equally, is

worth it. >> mr. chairman, you mentioned the fy-12 bills, and here we are at the beginning of the year. it is early first quarter. you are still fighting over fy-11. surely despite the fact that you are trying to get the bills through the house by august, surely there will be another fight at september 30, on the fy -12 bills, do you expect an omni bus bill? it doesn't bode well for the fy-12 process. >> not necessarily. we are continuing now with the to 2012 hearings. we will have those over with in time for early summer, perhaps even earlier, to begin appropriating those bidge individual bills, getting them onto the floor, and asage through the house. i don't think at this moment in time the 2011 battle is having a delaying impact on the 2012

process. and i'm determined that it not. i want us to do regular order and pass the bills in the regular manner before the august recess, and that ambition is shared by my good colleague norm dicks, the ranking democrat on the committee. he and i are in agreement that we will proceed forthwit in an open way and pass these bills before august. you are known well -- >> mr. chairman, you are known well in your district. i wonder what it is like for you to be chairman of the appropriations committee when appropriations have become a dirty word and as you said, you have new members of congress that think that an earmark is a naughty thing that should never have surfaced.

>> well, i agree, the attitude of the country has changed as far as earmarks are concerned, and rightly so. but when they were in vogue and we did not have this fiscal crisis we're in, again, i represent the second poorest district in america, a region that's been plagued by flooding, by a flood of drugs, by rivers and streams that have been -- bill embarrass -- by rivers and streams that have become embare yassingly polluted. and i went after that. a drug problem that's been described as the number one in the nation. should i and a lack of good highways. and all sorts of duties that we have had to overcome. and i have tackled them.

the states did not have the resources. engineers can do that. so, yes, i worked in my career to help my people out of severe difficulties. so we are working through them to correct these problems. >> -- >> i don't don't see anything on the horizon, no. >> we are talk talking a will the about the fisskl year we are now in. there -- there is also talk about raising the debt ceiling

over the next couple months. are we going to start hearing more about longer-term reductions? would you personally be able to vote for a debt increase? >> we have debt ceiling sometime before may, and then you have the budget resolution for fiscal 2012, that is forthcoming from the budget committee. then we have the 2011 continuing resolution we're dealing with, and all the while we're doing hearings on the 2012 budget requests. so we have a number of big budgetary types of matters that are converging, and whether we want to or not, or whether that

is added or not, those things may become interrelated. >> thank you, sir, representative harold rogers, that you for being our newsmaker today. >> thank you mple -- thank you. >> and we will continue the conversation with julie and humberto. julie, let's start with you. you are running up against another deadline march 18. >> well, it basically sounds like he's locked in, that the house republicans are locked in to their position and they feel like the ball is in democrats' courts to come their way. there is not anything to give up in the way of spending cuts.

they want $61 billion in cuts, so, you know, vice president has only been to the hill once in this exchange, but there will have to be -- before anyone is willing to come off of their position. >> will the vice president continue to talk? >> it appears that it is at the highest levels of government now. spending issues are usually go by appropriateors, but now it has -- appropriators, but now it looks like the leadership is calling the shots. it is difficult because i don't see a clear path forward of how they are going to square the circle on this. >> you mentioned that democrats did come with a plan, and what are they saying? what are senate democrats saying