manufacturing businesses want, less regulation, lower taxes and real boost in apprentice ship. an extra 75,000 apprenticeships over and above what labor planned. >> does the prime minister agree that the bankers do a bad job in lending to small businesses and the real economy? and the police do a good job in helping to cut crime? can he explain therefore why he is cutting police pay whilst making the bankers walk away with millions? >> what we are doing is introducing a 2.5 billion pound leveey on the bank each and every year, which is going to raise more that labor's bonus tax raised in one year. so we are getting money out of the banks into the treasury. we are seeing the bank lending go up. none of these things happened under the last government. >> mr. speaker, the lower courts have agreed with counsel that the illegal bill on

travelers site should be cleared. but because the previous government stopped the counsel taking action, the site has mushroomed inside. would the prime minister meet with me to ensure that justice is done? >> the honorable member has persistently raised this case. and i know he speaks for many people about this sense of unfairness. and one law applies to one and another law that applies to others. i will arrange a meeting to look at what can be done to make sure we have real fairness to all in our country. >> each week the house is in session we air prime minister's questions live. due to the daylight savings change it will air at 8:00 a.m. eastern instead of the usual 7:00 a.m. you can watch it again sunday nights starting at 9:00 eastern and pacific and c-span.org you

can see links to the house of commons and prime minister's web sites. >> coming up on road to the white house, representative michelle balk man speaks at a fund raising brunch hosted by the state's republican party in new hampshire. then, a discussion on the latest budget negotiations on the bill to fund the federal government. following that, on q&a john hullsman of the hague center for strategic studies talks about international plithcal and financial issues. monday on c-span 2, the american public transportation association is holding its annual legislative conference. you will hear from the administrators of the federal railroad and transit administration as well as the chief of staff of the transportation security administration. they are scheduled to discuss the future of the public transit system. that is live at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 2.

u.s. representative michelle backman traveled to new hampshire this weekend to speak at a fund raising brunch hosted by the state's republican party. this was her first political trip to the state this year which hosts the first of the nation presidential primary. in her remarks she criticizes the new health care law and the obama administration's economic policies. she says she will decide by early summer whether to pursue the 2012 presidential nomination. this is just over 40 minutes. [applause] >> thank you.

>> you lovers of liberty unite. three of our five biological children are here today. our brother, his wife, our three nieces and nephews. we thank you for the warm welcome you have extended to our family. we feel we are one of you today. thank you. thank you for welcoming us. [applause] >> we talked a lot already this morning about your great state model, live free or die, and it causes me to think about the motto of the state of west virginia -- "death to tyrants." you get this, these state mottos. we have been pretty proud in minnesota. we're known as the gopher state. we're proud of that.

actually, our state motto is the star of the north, and we're proud of that. there is nothing like live free or die, as long as there is no criminal intent. it is a great motto. another thing i like about new hampshire is the quality of the people and the kind of people. you are considered stoic, independent, blunt-speaking people. i fancy myself one of you. so i hope we can get along together. i feel the same way about that. last sunday morning i was on a show called "meet the press." maybe some of you have seen that show. on "meet the press" last week i said obama care, and again, this is the legislation that is already impacting our health insurance policies. remember, president barack obama famously said if we would get obama care our premiums would lower by about $2,500 per household. do you remember that? say hello to 20% increases in premiums, 40% increases in

premiums. what a deal. pay more, get less. that's kind of what we're looking at with obama care. and how do you like those over 1,000 wavers that we've seen given out from the federal government to favor states, including your neighbor to the east, the state of maine. 1,000 wavers. thank you, maine. you got a waiver. all i want to say is, i want a waiver, too. how about you? do you want a waiver from obama care? [applause] >> i think i want a waiver from the last two years of the obama administration. are you up for that? [applause] >> well, apparently in washington, d.c. it is not polite to call something for what it is in that town. and i said that we have a gangster government running the

show down in washington, d.c. and i don't step back from that statement. this is an administration that is intent on taking from its opponents and giving to its friends. there is a lot in common with a lot of chicago's history in this administration. just like we saw jimmy carter's administration -- remember the malaise administration? just like we saw after one term, it is my firm belief and conviction that barack obama needs to be a one-term president. [cheers and applause] >> i i think we can do better in our senate with harry reid where

he is set on preserving cowboy poetry, first of all. that's what you consider responsible government. just as important, i think it is wonderful that all of you here in new hampshire did your duty. you helped us take that immense gavel out of nancy pelosi's hands. you have given us back our wallet. [cheers and applause] >> you did it with charlie bast, thank you for giving us back our et. [cheers and applause]

one more time new hampshire, because you have set the standard for the rest of the nation. this wasn't an easy state, but you did it. you cracked the nut, and you were able to send liberty freedom-loving people to serve and represent you. now we need to replicate exactly as jax kimble said, what new hampshire has done, we have to replicate that in all 50 states. this is our brief window of opportunity in 2012 to win the triple crown -- the united states senate running that up to 60 seats of liberty-loving conservatives. in fact, i wouldn't mind seeing -- i don't know if i have one, maybe senators that have something in common. [applause] how would you like that? [applause] did anyone ask the all important

question this morning, tea anyone? tea anyone? i would like to see some tea served in the united states senate. 60 seats of tea served in the united states senate in 2012. an overwhelming majority of conservatives, tea-loving supporters, and how about a united states president that gets what the american people want in 2012? [applause] >> and that will include -- [crowd members chanting] >> and this is what we call political theater. as soon as our theater is over, we will continue.

that's ok. they just brought the buses in from madison, wisconsin. don't worry anything about it. we'll go back and enjoy the rest of our time together. thank you so much. thank you for your warmth, thank you for your love, and thank you for your welcome. get ready. we're seeing this kind of a response, because the left knows we're coming, and we're serious about 2012. we're serious. bring it on. we're ready for you. we're getting the party off to the right foot, and they know it, because they know new hampshire is not about to let go of these liberty-loving games that we made. if you know the left has targeted new hampshire as one of their first four states that they planned to flip back into the progressive column. are you going to let it happen? >> no. >> absolutely not, because we are going to take our country back in 2012.

[applause] >> we're going to see you take back your next senate seat in new hampshire, and we're going to do that by getting the party off on the right foot in this first state in the nation for primaries, the all-important caucus states. i love it. this is something minnesota does have in common with new hampshire. we -- when we are trying to get elected in our state, we have to go living room to living room, person to person, to shake hands and get to know each other. isn't this a great way of electing the people's representatives so we can listen to what the people say? what a novel concept. we listen to you. that's the teaparty. we listen. [applause]

>> and please, my new hampshire friends, fully appreciate just how important you are in this process. we heard from jeff this morning, the importance of your earliest freedom lovers, who literally will willing to spill their blood on this soil and the soil of massachusetts in order to secure our liberty once again, it will be up to new hampshire to stand p and deliver for us. that ever is at stake. would you go to choose the quament and -- quality and the kind of candidate that we want to lead our nation in 2012. you decide whether we will live free and prosperous. you decide. you will make that decision. or whether we will be that first

nation and first generation in the history of the country. not successfully -- if i were a betting woman, i'd put my money on new hampshire. i think you're up to it. [cheers and applause] >> i was a federal tax attorney. that's where i learned firsthand up close and personal how damaging the united states tax code is to individuals and farmers and businesses and families. i saw that devastation, and i wanted to do something about it. let me share with you the first figure. 5%. think about this number, 75% and what it means to you. 75%. this is the amount that our national debt has increased under speaker pelosi's four

years as speaker of the house. it took us 231 years to accumulate debt. about $8 trillion. it took her four years to accumulate 75% of that amount or an additional $6 trillion. let me give you another figure. $1.213 trillion. that reflects the amount of the united states treasuries now held by the federal reserve. that is as a result of this controversial policy known as quantitative easing part two. i am a business person. marcus and i started our business from scratch. we're proud. we're now up to 50 employees in our business. we're proud of that. [applause] we signed both sides of a

paycheck. what we've seen is a debasing of our currency. part of what the federal reserve was charged to do was to see our currency, our dollar, hold its value. has our dollar held its value under the watch of the federal reserve? hardly. ron paul will tell you the currency has lost approximately 96% of its value. i think it is time for a job evaluation in the federal reserve. [applause] in fact, the federal reserve is now the largest holder of u.s. treasury. and consider china owns almost $1 trillion worth of u.s. treasury. and the president of china, as you know, is named president hu. president hu. so it could rightly be said, "hu 's your daddy."

but now i think you could say ben bernanke is our daddy as the head of the federal reserve. now, let me give you another figure. $107 trillion. that's the estimate of the unfunded federal net liabilities for social security and medicare. look at all those zeros. this is reality. this is why we have to take on 65% of the federal budget. remember our current budget this year, we're no lean, mean machine in washington, we are $3.8 trillion in a budget. 65% of that are entitlement programs -- social security, medicare, medicaid. 107. i think that's written up there wrong. it should be $10 trillion. that number is wrong. it is 107 trillion.

that is the estimated unfunded liability of social security. and remember, this year is the second year in a row that social security has been sending mower money out in checks than what it's taking in. that's six years ahead of time from what the projections were. by 2016 medicare is scheduled to be flat broke. where will they go? the programs will have to go to the treasury. i'm here to tell you when you go to the treasury, you open up that door moths and feathers fly out. there is nothing behind that treasury. yes we have revenues coming in, but as you know, this year alone the deficit will be $1.65 trillion. this is remarkable. under the big spending george bush -- and he was a big spender. i respect our president, but he was a big spender. just consider in 2007, the deficit was something less than $175 billion for the year.

last month under barack obama the deficit was $223 billion. we are going off the cliff with out of control spending. new hampshire, if you don't remember anything else i said today, remember this -- stop the spending now. stop it. stop the spending. [applause] it stops now. the reason for that, every individual in this room under 35 years of age, you are the debt-paying generation. you could quite simply be looking at a reduced standard of living unlike anything the united states has seen before. and we'll get into that a little more as we go on. 35%. let's look at that next. that's the job-killing corporate income tax rate here in the united states. this is an incredible statement. the united states of america this year will be the top nation

in the world with the highest corporate tax rate of any nation. do you want to know why jobs are getting out-sourced from america. look no further than this figure. 35%. $3.8 million. that's our next number. that's the i.r.s.'s estimate of the number of words in the tax code. how many of you are busy filling out your tax forms right now? this is something i know something about. when we call the i.r.s., they couldn't even give us an actual number of words in the tax code. and you are liable under penalty of perjury and under jail time to get this right. $3.8 trillion. happy reading. i hope you are enjoying it. april 15th is coming. let's look at another number. $1.2 trillion. that's the estimate that we spend in this country for compliance with regulations. i consider the regulatory burden in this country one more tax on

the job create -- creators of this nation. now the number one figure. this administration has issued one permit zshzpactly one permit to drill for energy since barack obama came into office. as soon as he came into office he instructed ken salazar to cancel 77 permits that had already been issued. let's look at the next number -- $1.83. that's the price gasoline was in our country the day before barack obama took office as president of the united states. my how times have changed. we can do a little bit better, don't you think? i think so too. [applause] 19-20. that's the number of metropolitan markets across the united states. boston, for example, where

housing prices have fallen last quarter. so that's for 19-20 metropolitan markets. a price of housing has fallen. name one city in the united states, there is only one, where housing prices have fallen. washington, d.c., the boom where money never goes down. that big bubble. you're right. they think that hollywood is la-la land. i'm here to tell you, that's a different place. 8.9%. what's that? that is the lowest unemployment has been in the last 20 months. and that doesn't include the count of under-employment as well. these are not good figures. 6,000. what does that represent? that represents the number of pages of rules and regular layings that the obama administration has already written to implement the highly controversial transformational piece of legislation known as obama care.

6,000 pages. and you thought that the health care bill was bad. it was nearly 3,000 pages long in the senate, and that bill will never be finance shalled -- will never be finished being written because the bureaucrats have already written an additional 6,000 pages of bureaucracy to bind us. 159. that's the number of boards and commissions that obama care will create. so now you have to deal with your doctor and yourself and you have your insurance coming in between. now you have to fight 159 boards between you and your doctor and you also have to fight the 6,000 pages of regulations and growing. now our final number. $105 billion. has has anyone in the last week heard me talk about $105 billion.464. this is a booby trap.

speaker pelosi, hairy reid, and -- this is money that was hidden in plain sight. as you know, in the united states senate, the final version of the obama care legislation didn't even get to the senators until just a couple hours before they were going to vote. creates a funding stream. it is called authorization. that's what obama care was. then what we do to fund that program, we pass a second bill called an prum. -- appropriations. for instance, we could authorize that we will will -- that we will buy a ticket to disneyland. then we pass an appropriation to give the money to buy those tickets so you can go to disneyland.

if we pass the first bill, we can brag about how we passed a bill to send you to disneyland, but you're not going unless we put the money in the second bill to pay for the ticket. understand? well, what happened with obama care -- again, this wasn't an interest significant piece of legislation. i think the american people were paying attention. on this legislation if you recall, you look up any newspaper search, you look up any radio arkife. jeff's radio show, for instance, or any television show, how many times have you seen debated $455 million to implement obama care? do you remember that debate? i was paying attention. i was on the frontline. did any of you come down to washington, d.c. maybe and get on a bus and help us. there you go. the state of maine. remember maine.

this is amazing. think of what's happened. in the most controversial piece of legislation recognize, in the rassmussen polling for over 49 weeks straight, not just conservatives, not just republicans, but if you poll all americans, a majority of americans for over 49 weeks have said repeal obama care. no other issue in modern times or in polling history has garnered so much universal support. think of that. probably going back to the kansas-nebraska act in the 1850's. no other piece of legislation has so garnered the public's attention they so thoroughly dislike this bill. and our democrat leadership just happened to drop in $105 billion in funding. did it escape harry reid's mind

to tell the senators about this funding? did it escape nancy pelosi's mind? i think barack obama gave 153 speeches on obama care. did he just forget to mention, oh, by the way, we have $105 billion in this bill that we're going to implement socialized medicine? no. this was intentional. they knew this would be an unpopular bill. they knew they could lose the gavel over this bill. they knew in order for this bill to survive, it needed money, and it needed to be implemented and it needed to be implemented immediately to get its tent cal -- tenticles through your lives and our institutions so no matter who was elected in the future, your franchise, your vote would be neutralized because they would get their way. i don't know about you, and and i don't exactly know why our republican leadership has not taken this up in washington, d.c., but i am insulted --

[applause] -- as a member of the united states house of representatives i am insulted that i was not given this information before the vote. and you should be, too, as the american people. because that's not the way we do business in this country. that's not what the brave men and women who have served our country. my father served in the air force. my stepfather served in the army. my brother retired out of serving in the united states navy. that is not the kind of nation that they went to war and that they put their lives on the line for because we are a representative, a constitutional republic. that is our government. this is a crime against democracy. not to reveal a material term of this legislation to the american people. [applause]

so let's sum up what all these figures mean to us. it means it is undermined currency. it means unfunded liabilities. it means unfathomable levels of regulation for our children and grandchildren. underwater homes. unsettled families. unemployment. under-employment. unknown, unwarranted, unstoppable. unstoppable spending. it has to stop now because it could mean the enof the american dream as we know it and it could come sooner than any of us would care to admit. now, in the live free or die state, all of you remarkable common sense people, if you were in a situation where you held that position, power in government, i think it is safe to say you would take action if you saw these numbers. that's why i'm there. i didn't go there to be a back

bencher and sit there and try and figure out how long i could stay in congress. i went there because i believe in this country, and i love this country. and i will not allow them to take away this country from freedom will have loving people. i won't allow it. [applause] because the real problems are the arrogant elite in d.c. who think they get how to r life far better than you are. so you can't be trusted to run your life. they have to run your life for you. they have a better plan for your health care. they have a better plan for your income, your w-2. they know how the environment should work. they run the fuel and command and control of our economy, and the climate change of fantasies that they live in. they think they can do that. their ultimate example of arrogance is obama care.

let me tell you about a bill i recently introduced, but it is in response to the fact that government even thinks they th should tell you how much water you should have in your toilet, what kind of light bulb you should be able to buy. and i decided i'm going to introduce the lightbulb freedom of choice act. [applause] because i think thomas edison did a pretty patriot yibbling thing for this country by inventing the light bulb, and i think darn well, you new hampshireites if you want to buy thomas edison's wonderful invention, you should be able to. that's my legislation. .

more spending. what about the tea parties? what have the tea parties said? we just want to be responsible with our own money. i don't know about you. i like these radicals. these are my people. [applause] and we also the senators, the

democrats fleed wisconsin. and now the new phrase is "when that's what they do. i do give the president kudos for one thing because at least when the president was a state senator, he did vote 136 times. i want you to know that. i do not want you to lose hope. we still are government of the people, by the people and for the people. we're not about to let it happen. the real solution is not the arrogant elites that are on the banks of the potomac in washington, d.c. the real solution is you. because you get it. you know how to run your life. you know how to buy healthcare. you know how the start a business. you know which toilet you want to buy or which light bulb you want to buy. you don't need them to tell you that. you can do it.

i trust you. you done it here in new hampshire. you hold town hall meet information your churches and communities. you gather. you know how to make it happen. you the solution. and i'm excited about having that be a part of what our government is for. we know what it is not for. government is not about bailing out wall street. that's why i voted against it. government is not about running banks. it is not about running car companies. it is not about a command and control society or wasting trillions of dollars. i do know what government is for. putting you back in charge. allowing you to make all of those fundamental decisions. reforming the tax code. one of the things i want to see happen. whether it is a fair tax or a flat tax, we cannot have 53% of

the people paying the federal tax burden in the united states. we need to spread that tax burden to all american [applause] and i believe we have and the americans the courage and the conviction to win, inch by inch, yard by yard, vote by vote, election by election as you have showed here in new hampshire in 2010, the election in 2012. you will be the keepers of the flame, i agree this time which brings us to another turning point in our nation going back to the civil war. this is our first republican president, abraham lincoln. he was leaving illinois for his inauguration. the nation was royaled in turm

-- oil. it was disintegrating. as he left the train in springfield, illinois he stopped at various locations to washington, d.c. it was a tension-filled trip. he had marshalls with him. he stopped in the city of indianapolis and while he was there, the nation on the press pouse of war, president lincoln poured out his heart to the gathering ground. i quote "i peal to you to constantly bear in mind that it is not with politicians and it's not with the president and it's not with the office-seekers but it's with you and the question is shall the union and shall the liberties of this country be preserved to the latest generation"? so if you were looking at me as

being your salvation for the country, you are looking at the wrong venue because you need to look in the mirror. the answer lies with you to keep and preserve the liberty just as you did initially and the immortal words of live free or die. it is with you to keep the liberty not with the politicians. and it's still true today. [applause] because i believe in you and i believe in the ideals of america. and i believe that this nation began as a miracle. we lost more battles than we won at the beginning. we never knew if we were going to make it or not. we're in a battle of our life right now, i guarantee you. but i believe that we are right for a miracle again.

and so i say i believe in america and i'm up for it. i believe in the future i think we can do it. i know we can do it. and so i ask you -- are you in for 2012? i'm in. are you in? [applause] god bless you, new hampshire. i knew we could count on you. and god bless the united states. god bless you new hampshire. let's do it. we'll win it in 2012. thank you, new hampshire. thank you! [applause]

[inaudible chatter] >> thank you. >> loved it. wow. wow. >> excellent. >> what does that mean? are you running for president? >> i am in to make sure that barack obama is a one-term president. i have an announcement that i'm -- i'm running as a team to make sure that barack obama

will be a president for one term. >> is that pushing you toward maybe going ahead with a presidential campaign? does it feel different than two months ago? >> we're taking all the factors into consideration. it's a me men us to decision. we need to have an inner assurance that it's exactly the right thing for us to do. we're trying to deliberately make the right decision. we think maybe the summer will be the time -- >> what do you see as you go along these trips specifically with what you've seen here in new hampshire that helps you decide that yes, i want to do it. what are you specifically looking going across? >> one thing after the election -- it was a change election. and we saw such incredible energy that was driven by people who consider -- who are worried about the runaway spending and the government take over of industry and the

government take over of health care and i wonder whether that energy would disapate and whether they felt they did their job. that hasn't happened. i think the people are more energyized than ever and that gives me great hope. >> for your potential candidacy or just in general? >> that is one factor. we'll take that into account for this summer's decision. >> is it true that you were offered to come here but you were invited by the tea party? >> you know i don't know how the logistics were handled. all i knew is i was delighted to come up here. we have friends up here. we knew the people were in new hampshire and the fact that they have such a love for liberty and we were really excited to come to new hampshire. >> do you have plans to return to new hampshire? >> i don't know if we've set a

date but i imagine we'll be back. >> are the people of new hampshire encouraging you to run? >> yes. but we appreciate the fact that they understand the challenge that lies before us and we're able to come together with a common cause. we want to see the country work. that's really it. people are very practical and they just wanted the country to work again. that's my opinion. i want the country to work again. and i am casting my lot with the fact that i believe the country can get out with this tail spin and we can move forward. so i'm excited. >> anyone else? great thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> awe. so -- awesome. >> great job. >> thank you. how kind. what's his name? >> doug. >> say thank you to him. sure. you know what, do you a sharpie?

that would be bert. thank you. -- that would be better. thank you. >> they are very efficient to get these down and out, aren't they? >> thank you. thank you. i'd love to. thank you. hey, ed, you look great. >> your memory's too good. >> well, you photograph well. >> there you go. thank you. oh, that's great! thank you! i agree. >> you're the best. >> hi, james. >> that's my husband. isn't he wonderful? aren't they great? they're so supportive. i -- i'm blessed to have such a beautiful family. thank you for your service and congrats. >> thank you. >> thank you -- thank you. may i have your autograph? >> sure.

congressman, we're going have to walk and talk. >> ok. >> we love it! >> you can watch it on youtube. [inaudible chatter]

[inaudible chatt >> the house returns on monday at noon eastern for morning hour speeches and 2:00 p.m. for speeched. current funding expires march 18. also two measures that propose to end assistance foreclosure plans. and dennis kucinich wants to require president obama to withdraw all u.s. armed forces from afghanistan by the end of the year. follow the house live on c-span. the senate also returns monday at 2:00 p.m. eastern. at 4:30, senators take up the

name at 5:30 p.m. and they take their first votes of the week on the small business administration programs. live coverage of the u.s. senate when members return always on c-span 2. >> now a reporter's round table on the latest developments concerning the continuing resolution talks between the white house and congress as well as other issues facing lawmakers this week. from today's "washington journal," this is about 45 minutes. ntinues. host: time for a is, why are the republican party constantly attacking the citizens of this with us is laura meckler and patricia murphy.

we took a look at the arrivals at the gridiron dinner last night. national journal headlines, " obama and daniels, he got the special mical instrument -- introduction at the dinner. as the band struck up a familiar chord he belted out -- born in the usa. [laughter] patricia, what does something like that say? guest: as much as everyone can talk about politics, it is still a relatively closed culture between those that are indeed. you can think that you know a

t, but there is so much going on behind the scenes. so much business is done without the american people's knowledge. it is an uphill climb every day. gridiron is a good example of that. guest: this is a case where you see people all political persuasions commingling. if you talk about insider washington, gridiron is always exhibit a. it is one of the most insider clubs out there. that is why they do not want c- span cameras there. even with a lot of tense moments and issues debated, you

often find that people in washington are willing to laugh together at the end of the day. host: we are talking politics and policy. here are the lines for democrats and independents. today we have with us laura meckler and patricia murphy. the most significant story of the last week? guest: there were two. in terms of politics. domestically there were continued discussions on the budget. republicans in the senate are battlinghe white house to discover how significant do cuts

will be. the forces of colonel gaddafi were bearing down on the rebels. the u.s. governmt is attempting to figure out what to do about it. guest: the budget is really tying down democrats and republicans. they cannot even agree where they are as a starting point rather than getting together as a compromise. i think that this is about policy and the 2012 election. this will be the issue. the second topic is just a brief hearing sponsored by peter king abt the radicalization of islam in the united states. it was sort of the storm to forgocalm -- storm before the

calm. the hearing itself was not that remarkable. congressman keith ellison, the first muslim elected to congress, had a very emotional moment. it was the media exploon of the day. the friday earthquake in japan has taken over most of the media coverage. host: what happens next? guest: i was not at that hearing, i do that know if anything was more attractive in terms of muslims in this country.

that is what these hearings can to produce. and i do not think we learned anything new about -- and the focus was people living in the united states attracted to radical islam. how big of a threat that they are -- i did not think that we learned anything that we did not already know. guest: i would not disagree with that. not as much done on the house side under benny thompson, but it has not been an area where that particular committee has tread much territory. i don't think they tread much new territory on thursday. i think you can check that box but the republican leaders have the message that they want to be

pushing about jobs and the economy. i don't think he didn't sell any favors by holding that hearing. host: i want to get back to the budget story. congress is looking at another continuing resolution. one papers is that gop freshmen are uneasy about the latest top gatt bill. a republican fm kansas city could be harder to pass than the last one. why would fresh chef, patricia murphy, be attracted to this particular one? guest: these freshmen came in on a wave of the demand from their days to get their hands around the budget, to reduce the amot of federal spending. if you do just another cr, you

are not tackling the issues. and it is not doing what the house-passed bill accomplished in the first place. you are defending -- defun ding a lot of programs that are popular with democrats. the freshman some are saying that they are not reported they are kicking the can down the road. host: puts a lot of pressure on the gop leadership. guest: this whole dynamic has a lot of pressure on them. let's make clear for the viewers that we're finding the year that we are currently in. this is to figure out how much money th will have for the rest of the year. in order to get this settled, it will have to be a compromise. everyone knows that.

except perhaps the freshmen republicans who do not won a compromise. it is interesting toear that they are complaining about this. you also have complaints on the other side. the white house does not want to keep doing these short-term continuing resolutions. they feel like eventually every one of these -- there are spending cuts in each one. if you keep doing this, it eventually you look at things that democrats are not comfortable cutting at all. at first they went for low hanging fruit, things the white house had already identified where money had not been spent and was needed and other programs. if you get to another one and there are more cuts, it is dying by at thousand knicks. host: our first caller's from hamilton, ohio.

caller: first of all, i am unemployed public safety workers. i have been watching the news and everything going on in wisconsin. what is send a happened in ohio. -- soon going to happen in ohio. i cannot understand how it has become such a big political thing. it is about theolitics, not about the people anymore. that is about all i can say about it. it really baffles me. and here i am, i am close to being homeless pretty soon. it is a sad situation. our country has become so politically the way it is. host: we appreciate you calling in. let's take a look at the scuffle outside the wisconsin state capital on the front of the nyt.

what is your take on what happened there and what it all means? guest: i is a very fundamental class of visions. that caller gets to that. it does not mean anything but politics, but it does mean thing. we have seen this play out in wisconsin in dramatic fashion. the republican majority in the legislature and the governor voted successfully to strip public employee unions of most of their collective bargaining rights. that is the basic question on whether union should have this power or that the budget problems are so severe we cannot afford that. what are our priorities? and it has ce to blows in some cases, an incredibly active protest by the union members in that state, in the capitol building for weeks.

and 14 democratic senators trying torevent this bill from coming up, unsuccessfully as it turned out. they found a way to do it. this a been a fundamental clash of what priority should be in terms of government spending, and how powerful unions should be. host: host: patricia murphy. guest: almost every state in the country israppling into massive budget shortfalls. most of that is driven by the cost to the states of employees and their pensions. everyone has to grapple with it. now when we have a lot of newly elected republicans as governors, they are going in and using it as an opportunity to rewrite the collective bargaining laws, because it makes thr jobs a lot easier if they do not have to negotiate with the unions to bring down these budgets. what has been fascinating to me is that this is turned into a

national debate, just a microcosm of a national debate with both parties pouring resources into the that -- into that debate. this is a fight that both political parties believe they have a huge political opportunity in if they win it. this is a lot like the budget debate and we will see a repeat of this debate over and over and over again. guest: state and local governments are really hurting. there have been jobs lost at the state and local level. it's indicative of what you're saying. even after the economy starts to come back, maybe it is starting now, in the private sector, it tas a long time for states to catch up. host: moving on to pennsylvania, thomas, a republican.

caller: c you hear me ok? i have a question for both laura and patricia. and the question is this -- i am a registered republican. i am a union member. i am also a government employee. my question is, why are the republican party constantly attacking the citizens of this country on our benefits, on our retirement benefits, and ways of cutting the budget and not addressing the 20 million illegal aliens in this country? it seems that if you address that problem, that would be the first big dent in solving our fiscalrisis in this country. host: first, patricia murphy. guest: the reason they are not tackling immigration head-on is that in some of the states there is a political downside to that. you'll see a significant lacof

leadership in that in both parties. but the reason the republicans are coming in and trying to balance the budgets and also go after unions at the same time is that that is a traditional goal that they have had. democrats have been traditionally the big union allies. you are republican and a union member which is much less the case. theemocratic party has n had a great relationship with unions over the las couple of years because they have and not gotten a lot out of the union's political wish lists taken care of. they did not get card check pass, in the health care bill there were provisions that would not help unions very much. it look like that wagoing to hurt them. the democratic party had to shore up thenion for the wrong political base. sometimes when you cannot understand why politicians are doing something, there's

probably a political downside to it. guest: and immigration is a very complicated issue. i would not say that is going to solve the state budget issues. there may be some overlap, but those are not going to get their hand in hand. in order to pass comprehensive immigration budget legislation, something that the president would be willing to sign, it will almost certainly have to include a provision that allows people here in this country illegally, some 11 million people, to be gaining citizenship. that is what republicans referred to as amnesty. republicans are more interested in shoring up the border. there has been quite a bitown on that. but that is what talking points are focus on. an actual comprehensive solution which has eluded congress for years now has some difficulties is to for each party.

there's absolutely no side that that is going anywhere. host: lots more phone calls coming in but i wanted to get back to libya. you have probably heard that the arab league yesterday endorsed a no-fly zone over libya. a complicated process, if you list to the experts here. but the "washington post," this headline. what's to happenext, patricia? guest: nato members will meet on tuesday to discuss the no-fly zone as well. these are the first -- these are part of the decision making process for the obama administration. they are loath to do anything that is not a multi-national effort. they do not want to get involved in libya in any way or any military action where it is just the united states acting alone.

there's a huge political downside to that if it does not turn out a way that they wanted it to. at the same time, the president has been very cautious on libya. he is getting heat on it. even senator kerry came out and said that the president is to show more leadership on this issue. there some areas where the president has been reluctant to take a serious leadership position. he was such an audacious mpaigners, and he has been very cautious assessing his options. host: laura meckler, on top of that, wesley clark says that libya is not worth the risk. guest: i do not know whether it is worth the risk or not. i will point to a story in the "jrnal," or senior milary

officials see this. they seem to be against the no- fly zone. it was largely needed -- to make sure that the president's options are all on the table. but in truth, the pentagon tends to be very opposed to this idea. we had one senior official saying that is so problematic to put boots on the ground. i worry about no alternative to the government. we have seen that movie before. they are concerned about a repeat of iraq, where this would be an easy military situation, let's get saddam out of there. and then 10 years later we are still there. the military is very cautious about military intervention. think e no-fly zone is no big deal, throws some planes in the air in your done.

but what happens next? i think that is why it's in the president be so cautious. he has his own military people cautioning the full course here. international consens as well. host: water bird, connecticut on the democrat line. caller: a comment than a question. warren but that -- buffet said that there was css warfare. john maynard -- john boehner says that the country is broke. the top 1% control 40% of the wealth. there are tax cuts in december as they were to create jobs. now we are broke. that does not make a lot since. to balance the budget, pretty

much using middle-class and poor, all are they going to give us tax cuts for the rich 1% or are they going to keep those and try to balance the budget? guest: it is interesting because when you talk about raising taxes, is usually raising taxes on upper-income people. republicans are done with raising taxes. it is not because they want to tax the rich but because they do not want a tax anyway. cutting spending -- a large percentage of federal spending is directed at the poor people. head start, the schools, a large number people who want low- income family, help for women, infants, children, many federal programs target lower income people. if you need to target spending, you learned by nature moving more toward the side of lower

income people. there is federal spending that house more upper-income people, farm subsidies, some people who would disagree that that is the case, but they do help some upper-income farmers. there are a lot of spending cuts that affect the poor. it depends on your outlook. if you ask the democrats, that would have no problem increasing taxes on the top 1% as the call said. the president wants to earn -- raise taxes on any family earning over to under $50,000 a year. so far that has been a nonstarter. guest: part of the reason that they cannot agree on little things in the big things is because they have a huge philosophical differences on how to balance the budget. democrats want to raise taxes on the wealthy and businesses. everyone wtso reform the tax code which is very difficult.

republican will not put tax increases on the table. for them, it is a complete non starter. they want a balanced budget by reducing spending. that deficit addition -- commission says that you need to do both. each has one side that they will not pay attention to. guest: republicans are dragging this debate right now. it is not should we cut spending but how much how quickly. >> if you look at the vote in the senate this week, the house- passed budget bill that two more than the democratic cr. there is more leverage on the republican side and even more support from the senate which is dominated by democrats. it is amazing to watch and the republicans absolutely have the upper hand. the democrats are in denial on the right now. host: we expect them to put out

their budget next month. guest: that is for next year. host: people will be looking for specifics. guest: what a lot of people look for is what would they do about entitlements spending. there's been a lot of debate over very small slices of the pike, non-defense domestic discretionary speing. there's a variety of credit -- domestic spending programs. buzzy the things that you think of when it is government but that is a very small part of the total budget, about 12%. what are they going to propose on social security, on medicare and medicaid? these are tough problems to solve, particularly the health care problems. how to control spending over time. the solutions are not easy as we saw during the health care reform debate. the democrats tried to cut spending from these programs in order to use the money for the

subsidies, and even that was difficult to get through. this will not be easy. guest: you think it would have been done that by now. another huge spike we will see happen is the question of raising the debt ceiling. this is something united states has to do by statute in order to make sure the united states does not default on its debt. if we default, there would be enormous, enormous repercussions around the world. this is when the house freshmen come back into the scene. th areaying they will not vote to raise the debt ceiling without significant commitments on entitlement reform. that is a first in decades that we're seeing people agreeing to not only look at entitlement reform -- is truly the third rail of american politics. host: gordon in sarasota, florida. you are on the independent line. caller: my comment is directed

to ms. meckler. earlier you commented and made a comment that the republican freshmen were complaining. i take issue with that. it has to do with the evaluation of the currency. you do not have t look to any other country to see what occurs when the government starts printing its currency. at least you understand that most taxes are directed toward the port. anyone holding currency which constitutes a creditor, and printing worthless money is defrauding anyone that has any of this money. it is the greatest tax on the poor people of this country by evaluating t currency, and they make comments that the republicans are complaining because they do not want to

devalue the currency, i found our rages and reckless. guest: just because they are complaining does not mean that the composer not legitimate. a lot of people complain about things that are wrong. other people view them as misplaced. i was not attempting to take sides. host: frank is on the line from buffalo, new york. caller: i wanted to make a comment by the -- thatas a good statement from the guy from florida. and the young republican talking with the silver tongue, complaining about not happy with the way that things are going. that's look at japan. maybe we should think about this a minute. in japan, they have the devastation. all the other countries are sending help. oh, but guess what?

you did not hear people from egypt, iran, afghanistan, anybody like that sending any help to those people. but we spend billions of our budget for those other countries. so wake up, america. let's get some money back into those countries. host: moving on to albuquerque, new mexico. kenny, a democrat. caller thank you for taking my call. some really good debate going on this money. i agree with my republican colleagues there, i cannot wait to see ron paul trying to get around to the debate, because it is interesting how they lock him out in the past. also talking about entitlement spending, i think we should address some of the subsidies going to oil companies if you want to be serious about

balancing the budget. i think what the gridlock is showing in washington is that we desperately need a third party. that is when we can come together as americans and get our best ideas to solve these complex but important issues. thank you for taking my call. host: let's touch on the oil part of that comment. the situation in the millies, rising gas prices, we had speaker boehner come out this week to talk about the high prices. there is this story here -- can either of you make the connection between higher gas prices, economic conditions, and politics? guest: gas prices are one of the areas that affect americans the most immediately. it gets americans the most changes. it is also one thing things that politicians had the least ability to at that. there is almost nothing they can

do in the short term to do anything about gas prices. thinking come out with energy plants, pposals to release the strategic petroleum reserve, which is rarely done, but there is nothing else they can do except talk about it. you have a lot of talk about gas prices on the hill. democrats and republicans will use it aan the reason to move forward on their energy plants and that is where you see completely divergent proposals and very least you to -- room to compromise. guest: obama has taken criticism from both sides of his party on. the situation in libya as i understand it is not that they are not producing enough oil and that is why we have a drop in supply. in fact, the amount that they have stopped putting on to the world market has been made by other countries, particularly saudi arabia. that is not really the issue. but there is a lot of jittery

ness about what has happened. those concerns tend to tie -- drive up the price of oil and that is what has happened. republicans and democrats have called on the white house to act in different ways. the white -- the president called a press conference on friday to address this issue specifically. basically there was a lot of stay the course policies. host: michael from pennsylvania on the independent line. michael, are you there? i think we lost michael. let's try another caller in pennsylvania, john, are you there? caller: i liked to talk about a fresh way of looking at things going on in the country. maybe the public sector cut their wages and benefits, and maybe that is not the problem. maybe the problem is that the private sector is to love.

it is to love. if you go back for years -- it is too low. the private sector starting in the 1980's, their wages and benefits started to stagnate, and in some cases to go backwards. when i was a teamster truck driver, i was making good wages and benefits. i did not care what the teachers and the cops or the school bus drivers were getting because i was getting those good wages and benefits and all boats were rising. since the 1980's, all boats have not been rising. the public sector and the private sector has been separated. the problem tme is not that we should drop the teacher wages and benefits of the public sector, which is a race to the bottom, if but we should be trying to be -- bring back the wages and benefits of the private sector so that all boa will rise again.

gut: an interesting point. i think that what we have seen is that private-sector union have declined in power, a decline in membership, if you are in private sector who are unionized to put that pressure on the private companies to increase union benefits. perhaps all of the growth in union membership has been on the public sector. perhaps that is some of what is going on here. i do not know enough about the details to say this for certain, but i think that it is a lot easier said than done to increase everyone's wages. guest: public sector employees, you cannot outsource them to india. no one in india will ck up your garbage. that is an advantage over private sector employees random. and when you have to look of

what is going on, everyone is concerned about the jobs numbers. the democrats have in their mind a number of unemployment that if they do not get down below, by 2012, they assu they will be out of jobs. they know how of said americans are. -- how upset americans are. going to the polls and voting them out our party is one of the ways americans feel like they can do something about it. host: 1 headline we read recently by rigid from the "new york times." nearly all the contenders from both parties were already in the race by now before. this time, none have really plunged in. why you think that is, laura meckler? guest: it has been very slow to get off the ground. and i have to say, there is some

sense of relief about that, because it seemed like last time the race went on forever. the fact that is going to only last a year and have, as opposed to two full years, it may not be the worst thing in the world. part of the factor is if no one has fully jumped 10, it puts new pressure on the others to jump in. people move with in tandem. once o major candidate johnson, we will see others follow. host: in 2010, the early as candidates to get in did not win. john mccain got so early he went broke before he had to have the renaissance and came back and got the nomination. if you look at the past, it is so expensive to jump in early.

it is like an arms race. as long as no one else is out there fighting, you do not have to get in there either. i think people learn their lessons from 2008. host: time for a couple of more calls. caller: i wanted to comment. i think the mia has framed this fight in wisconsin that the republicans are evil and union- busting. if you could comment on why no one is bringing up the point that oth states such as texas, virginia, they have done away with collective bargaining for their public-sector unions long ago. there were no riots. there is no outrage. this is about union dues and the ability to fine-tune -- all mone to one party, i.e., the democratic party. guest: you see a different

approach because of different cultural approaches. in madison, wisconsin, that is where the union movement was born. that is why there is a much heed around that debate in this particular state. above and beyond that, to repeat myself, every state is grappling with the situation that the pie is getting smaller and they have to start giving it up in different ways. employees had very expensive packages to pay for. so it was running the budget of a lot of the states into the ground. republicans traditionally are not allies of unions. they can show this to their base voters, that they will turn around on unions. i think there's a political calculation for some of those republicans. host: good morning.

caller: the three of you may be at of touch when it comes to how well thehe up -- the most wealthy art. the upper 1% do not need a tax break. it should probably rise to 50% i know this firsthand about how the wealthy spend money. they spend it like it is monopoly money andike it does not matter. they will buy several million- dollar homes that they do not need, ocean houses, i see people remodeled kitchens, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in one kitchen, when you and i would be more than happy with those kitchens that they remodeled for the rest of our lives. i know people who have spent $20,000 a week for a first-class vacation wherever they want to go in the world. and i know people who will take these kinds of vacations dozens

of times per year, spending money like i say, i think the american people are out of touch withhe kind of wealth and the taxes on the rich people could go up. i think it was somewhere -- even if they amounted to $100,000 for a wealthy family, i do not think it would amount to that much. guest: i can assure you that most journalists are not in the category of $20,000 for a week's vacation. [laughter] certainly not working at the "wall street journal." i think you have a allies that are very much willing and have made that point that, even the president of the united states. he wants to see taxes f families over $250,000 a year ago of.

i think that there are people quite willing to raise taxes on the upper income. the republicans control the house right now. they are not among them. guest: the caller did not mean to make the point, but that is the republicans on why you should not raise taxes. they spend money opulently. they do buy houses, and they only -- they buy cars, they buy clothes, they buy everything that you could imagine. and there are americans and the other end of that transaction getting a piece of that type. if you increase taxes for the wealthy, they will not be able to spend that money in it will not end up helping the economy. that is the wire republicans say you should not raise taxes on the wealthy. host: south carolina, independent line, welcome to the program.

caller: has anyone noticed that when we get tax cuts, that the price of gas goes up, that the prices for your medication goes up, your insurance goes up? across-the-board tax cuts have never worked for me. when george bush said it is your money, you spend it the way you want to, that was a lie. i had the spend my money the way i had to and not the way i wanted to. you have expensive things like gas. and in libya like you just pointed out, there is not a lesser amount of gas coming in, it is just that it is coming in from somewhere else. the oil speculators are using these hot spots in the middle east just to be able to raise the prices of their product. host: a final thought from each of our guests beginning with patricia murphy. guest: the amount of gas is not

any different. i do not work for the "wall street journal," but i think the prices will go up to what the market can bear. the people have more money, they all more have to go out and spend. i think that is something that politicians are grappling with every day. guest: there was done across the cut rigid across-the-board tax cut in december, and president obama noted on friday that it could use some of that money for the increased cost of gas. at least you have that cushion. i do not know that there is a relationship between the fact that taxes were cut in december and the situation in libya that has prompted uncertainty on the oil market causing the price of gas to go. but it may feel that way. host: our guests have been laura meckler and patricia murphy.

>> tomorrow on "washington journal," a look at the g.o.p plans toy jobs with -- to create jobs with mike coffman. john morton and after that dr. anne albright talks about their latest study on the gee bra graphic distribution of diagnosed -- -- geographic distribution of diagnosed diabetes. today on "and a, john hulsman. and then on the