room from snl. >> good evening, i'm wolf blitzer. and this is the situation room which, three nights a week, also doubles as my bedroom. earlier this week, president barack obama spoke in el paso, texas, and while the topic of the speech was immigration reform, it let's take a look. >> feeling good, el paso. feeling good, too. going to talk about immigration. first, not sure if you heard the news, we killed bin laden! [ cheers ] yeah.

great to be back here in texas, the lone star state, home of george w. bush, the 43rd president. the 43rd president to not kill bin laden, that is!laden! >> and joined now by senior political analyst jennifer kates. he seems upbeat. >> simply put, it has put the president in a great mood. it's a clean political win. he knows it, and i can't remember the last time i saw him this relaxed and confident. >> indeed. so confident, in fact, at one point in the speech he started openly smoking. >> killed bin laden. great. barack hussein obama. that's right. i'm not hiding anything anymore. i'm not hiding me. i'm not hiding the hussein, either. don't have to.

in fact, i might even night's snl.st tomorrow morning, we will continue the conversation. much of the focus will be on raising the debt limit as we reach that $14.30 trillion debt ceiling. we will be joined by a senior fellow at the peterson institute on economics. there will be some background from eric pianin. tomorrow, we begin a five-part series looking at the issue of homeland security. we will focus on the department itself, airports occurred, and, later in the week, civil rights and social liberties, border security technology, and bioterrorism. that is all this week on c- span's "washington journal." thank you for joining us this

sunday. i hope you have a great week ahead. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> coming up, senator just bingaman, talks about gas prices and proposed tax breaks for oil companies. then oil executives testified to a senate panel on some of the same issues. after that, the release of a new report showing medicare and social security becoming insolvent sooner than previously thought. and the president's speech in el paso on immigration.

>> to mark, we look at how small businesses can protect information from several tax. -- tomorrow, we look at how small businesses can predict cybermation from small attacks. >> newt gingrich and i am announcing my candidacy for president of the united states because i believe we can return america to hope and opportunity. >> with a field of presidential hopefuls beginning to take shape, follow the candidates announcements and speeches on the road to the white house and look back of their careers on line with the c-span video library. search, watch, click, and share everything may have compiled

since 1987. >> it is nice to be here. >> we are joined by two reporters. >> senator, majority leader reid said a bill that would cut its oil tax breaks. it will be voted on next week. the savings should be used to pare down the deficit. it seems, in this political climate, the someone will have to pay, whether it is in medicare -- am sorry, in medicare or stallone's. do you think -- or student loans. do you think the big oil can afford these? >> they clearly can afford to give up some significant number

of these tax provisions. not just someone will have to pay, but everyone will have to pay if we will be able to really make a dent in this very large deficit and debt that we have accumulated. i think there will have to be significant spending cuts, significant revenue increases, which means that some of these tax provisions for tax expenditures, as they're called around washington, will have to be pared back. >> we saw the big five deals of the oil companies to shed at the hearing. >> on thursday. >> is this just political fair? rockefeller said that big oil will win in the end. every time we get high oil prices and gasoline prices, now $4 per gun, and it seems that the call to repeal the tax comes up again.

but it does not get done. is it just lawmakers posturing? >> there is obviously some posturing going on. at the same time, i think there is some value in putting the budget discussion in some context. i think that was one of the purposes of trying to do this hearing, which is to say that all the talk, particularly on the republican side, would be to cut back on various programs that are of assistance to people. if you will deal with the deficit, you can do it in two ways. you can come back -- you can cut back on spending. you can increase revenue by cutting back on some of these tax breaks. one of the purposes of the hearing was to remind people of that and to say is it really good sense to continue, with all of -- to continue of all of the

tax breaks in the code today while we are cutting away at the various programs that some people depend upon. >> just to be clear, are you a yes vote of this bill were to come to the floor? >> i have not decided how to vote. i certainly support paring back some of these tax breaks. whether or not there is a whole list of them in the proposal that has been brought forward and whether or not all of them should be pared back, i am not certain at this point. >> how would be passed? >> we have not had this particular proposal in the past. in some cases it has been to remove the text decks for oil industries. in other cases, the proposals cover to much. there was an argument made very strongly by the ceo's.

if you will change these tax provisions, you should not do it for just five companies, but more generally. so there is an argument there that deserve attention. >> and the money goes to other things besides tearing down the deficit. there are plans -- senator baucus was to support clean energy with it. would that not get some votes from natural gas? >> i think there are various provisions in the law that a scheduled to expire. there are energy provisions, particularly for clean energy sources. we will have to find the funds somewhere to continue with those provisions. i think it is important that we continue with some of them. this was one place that that funding could come from, reducing the benefits of the fossil fuel industry.

clearly, we need to reduce the deficit as will extend these tax provisions for clean energy going forward. >> does the bill have enough votes to get of the senate next week? >> i do not believe it does. i do not believe that -- i think the republicans have come up with some alternative. it does not have the votes either. i do not believe it is likely. i think that the votes we will have next week are motions to proceed to consider these bills. i do not think the senate will vote -- but there will be enough votes to consider either of the two bills. >> all of us are talking on this friday afternoon. we should mention for our viewers who will be watching this on sunday. this legislation is likely to come up the week ahead, the week

of may 16. one of the chief executives, that of exxon, at the hearing on thursday, said that they pay about 32% on average in u.s. income taxes. but tax increase would alter the investment decision. do these oil companies pay their fair share as has been said by some democrats who are wanting them to pay more? >> i do not know. that is a very subjective judgment, as to whether or not they are paying their fair share relative to other companies, relative to other taxpayers in the country. i think it is pretty clear that reducing some of the tax benefits would not, in any way, jeopardize the profitability of some of these companies. i do not doubt that they might

look at shifting around where they invest some of their funds and where they hope to have future production. some of that they move out of the united states if they felt like the tax burden in the united states was unfavorable to them compared to other countries. i think the profitability of these companies is pretty well established. as long as the price of oil is anywhere near where it is today, there will be fine. >> that we get steven dennis involved. >> everybody's thinking about gas prices. our viewers, everybody who has a car, i am sure you have seen it when you go to the pump. with $4 per gallon of gasoline, this bill, the democrats are pushing it but it will not do anything to the gas prices. do you think anything will get

through this congress, during this polarizing and vermin, whether it be on speculation or opening up -- polarizing environment, whether it be on speculation or opening up more fields? question have to look at the short term, the next -- >> you have to look at the short term, the next few months. in my view, is not realistic to think that we will legislate change on the price of oil short-term. i do not think it is likely to happen. for the price of the pump, short term. we can put policies in place to help keep the price of oil down in future years and will, thereby, keep the price of gas at the pump down in future years. >> you are working on -- is there something you're working

on that could get to the president's desk? in the past few years, the cap and trade bill by thyour legislation did not make it. there is an inability for congress to get major energy bipartisan legislation through. what kinds of things could we be looking at? >> i will give you a list. but you are right. the environment is a difficult one to get anything passed. i think there are some things we're considering in our committee, on the energy committee, that we could pass. that is if we could get cooperation. i hope we are able to. there is legislation to encourage communities to move more rapidly to facilitate the use of electric vehicles, for example. senator alexander from tennessee, and republican for tennessee, just

introduced this week that we will have a hearing on our committee and be able to move ahead with that. but it is long term. i think there may well be things that we can do to encourage more use of natural gas in transportation. that will displace oil. we have had reasonably good success in the last few years because of the renault will new standard that we put into law in 2007. we had reasonable success at getting biofuels more in use and displacing some of the oil. for the first time in a long time, we are seeing a reduction in the amount of oil that we have to import and a reduction in the amount of oil we have been using. we're moving in the right direction. i think it is possible that congress can do some more things in this session of congress to move this even further. >> one issue that has been very controversial for many years is

drilling. how do drop -- where do girl and how much do drill? republicans -- where do you drill and how much to drill? republican certainly keep talking about this. you were one of 44 senators in 2005 who filibustered opening up drilling in environmental reserves. do you still think that was the right decision? do you think, in this and vermin now with $4 per gallon gasoline, that you and other democrats might reconsider some of those decisions? >> no, i think it was the right position. that is still my position. people need to realize that, for the first time in the 30 years i have been around the senate, we are increasing our production of oil in this country.

it is not going down. it is going up. we're clearly increasing our production of natural gas in this country. so the idea that we're shutting off everybody's ability to produce oil and gas is just not accurate. the increase in that occurred in a couple of years that president obama has been in office has been substantial. it is not primarily his policies that have caused it. it is primarily the new technologies, the new techniques that are being used by the industry. but we are seeing increases in production. i favor increases in production. i have voted that way consistently. >> but it is an issue that keeps coming up. it seems like it is harder and harder to justify oil

that is $100 a barrel and that we should not drill their. >> that is a wildlife refuge that ought to be kept free of drilling activity. if you do not think it should be, then fine. you support opening it up. i have felt that it should be kept as a wildlife refuge and not have drilling activity there. i think the idea that by opening an war we will see a drop in the price of oil worldwide is not the real world. it has a lot more to do with have a new -- how many new consumers are coming in, with china and buying cars and demanding oil. those increased demand for gasoline and oil are what are driving the price of oil up. as well as the turbulence in the

middle east and north africa, which, of course, creates great uncertainty about future supply. >> president obama unlaced the big plan to double clean energy production, using nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. is that going anywhere? is it something for his second term? >> we hope it is going somewhere. senate -- senator rakowski and and i senator murkowski have put together a paper and how you could construct a so- called clean energy standard which would be along the lines of what the president talked about in his state of the union speech. it would basically say that we want 80% of the electricity that is produced in the country produced from so-called clean energy sources by 2035.

we are now seeing -- we have gotten nearly 300 responses back. we asked people for comments on it. we're now trying to figure out if we can put together a draft peace of legislation that could get enough votes to be seriously considered in our committee. we do not have the enter to that yet, but we're trying in a conscientious way to get to something that would achieve the kind of objective the president laid out. >> to you think the administration is getting aggressive on that or is working with congress now on its? the last time, that -- the last time there was a sweeping energy climate bill, the administration pulled back and did not work with congress as much as it would have. >> in trying to come up with a draft proposal, that is the stage we are at right now. if we can get a draft proposal

that has bipartisan support, i assume that they would use all of their abilities to persuade people to it. that needs to be said in the context of everything is tough in this congress. trying to get agreement from the house of representatives to anything along the lines that the president laid out will be a difficult proposition. i think we're all moving in that direction, trying to see if it can be done. >> we have about 10 minutes left. >> the nuclear power issue, obviously, we have this disaster that continues to unfold in fukushima with talks of meltdown and terrible radiation. nuclear power seemed to be the bipartisan lynchpin of getting anything major dan. is there still -- anything major

done. is there still anything significant that can be done with nuclear power or do you think you have to wait -- does their need to be a cooling-off period of sorts before you can really address that issue? >> the issue of nuclear power, we have done a lot of things in the 2005 energy bill to try to encourage more nuclear power plant in infrastructure in this country. some of it has been successful. there have been no applications to the regulatory commission. there has been movement on that front, not as much as the industry had hoped, not as much .s a lot of folks had hoped right now, there are no proposals pending in our committee that have a lot of substance to them on the overall subject of nuclear power.

the one thing that we are all working on, hoping to have a hearing on in the next few weeks, it is modular nuclear reactors, versus larger nuclear reactors. we think there is a potential use for and can be produced in a very safe way. it is not as though the republicans have a proposal for expanding nuclear power. that is not the case. i would strongly support would senator de medici advocated in the 2005 bill and we enacted it. what else does have -- what else does the government have to do to make this so-called nuclear renaissance occurred? the truth is that economics is not very good. as cheap as itas the wa is, the prospect of building a

new nuclear power plant has to be compared to the cost of building a new gas-fired generation plant and the gas fired wins out in most cases. >> the president said a few weeks ago, when the oil price was $113 per barrel -- now it is $100 per barrel -- that he has a new plan to tap the new strategic reserves keyed up. it would only take a few days to get it done instead of weeks since he has a plan already. have you seen that plan already? is it a good one? at what point do you think it is wise to use that resource? >> i have not seen the plan as such. i cannot comment whether it is a good one or a bad one. i do think, at least in the short term, the time has passed when we should be seriously

considering using the strategic petroleum reserve. the idea of the strategic foreign reserve was to be able to respond to disruptions in supply, not just respond to changes in price. but if there was a disruption in supply that threaten the economy or the united states in some way, we would be able to respond. i think that is the right use of the strategic supply. there was a disruption in supply when the turmoil began in libya. the continues. but i do not see it worsening. there is no shortage of oil worldwide. one reason the price of oil has come from $113 down to $100 per barrel is that analysts who

follow this i regular basis have realized that there is no shortage. there is not likely to be a shortage. and the price had gotten higher than could be justified. >> the senate in general, you have been very long time. you are retiring. i want your sense on what today's senate is like. for me watching it, it does not seem like a whole lot is happening. this week, all the vote was on judges. a single vote was on a judge this week. the small business bill ended up in a drawer somewhere because the democrats did not want to vote on an amendment. is there just an inability to get things done in this senate? what is your sense of why things are so slow and why there does not seem to be much other than the big deficits and debt talks

that can get to the floor? >> there are a lot of factors. you're right. the senate is not functioning the way i would like to see it function. i think that the polarization that has settled in here in washington is a large part of that. that is a partial explanation for it. i think a lot of folks are being elected to office these days with a real commitment not to compromise, not to give in to the other side. of course, we have large constituencies out there that are insisting that they not compromise. it is hard to govern, hard to operate the senate as it was intended to operate if you do not have a willingness on both sides to compromise and work things out.

we have a presidential election coming up next year. that is undoubtedly beginning to have an impact on our ability to get things done and it will continue to as we approach that to date. there are a lot of different factors that make it difficult. >> what is the overriding concern about the deficit right now? you have the gang of six. you have all these big talks going on out there. is there not enough oxygen left in the room to get other things done? even something as basic as the faa authorization bill, which passed the senate, is one of the things that did get done. they still cannot work it out quite with the house. is the oxygen all this other issue? " to some extent, i think that everyone is -- >> to some extent, i think everyone is preoccupied with how we will get

a budget agreed to and how to get the debt ceiling raised. that is the top priority for the president and for the leadership of congress right now. there's no question about that. but the same factors that are polarizing that debate come into play whenever you try to do pretty much anything else, like the small business research bill that you referred to that we have not been able to get final action on. >> we have time for probably two more questions. >> yucca mountain, we were talking by nuclear waste, it is pretty much on ice. it is not popular among democrats and others and not popular in nevada. we saw the blue ribbon panel for obama on nuclear waste which is putting out a draft plan today on what to do with nuclear waste. waste.