encourage more students to study in anhui and provide them with scholarships. innovation cooperation should become an important part of our educational cooperation. we need to seize the trend of science and technology. we have always taken innovation as a priority. we will strengthen our cooperation in energy, and based on the protection of our pr, we are ready to strengthen cooperation with the united states. in terms of qualitative research, we expect to expand our cooperation with the united states in setting up a research center, and third, i believe the government's at the national level need to play a very active

role in educational exchanges. we need to take the lead to four new platforms for educational corp. and the exchange of young people and work towards new steps and bigger steps. our governors can be very important players in this process. ladies and gentlemen, education helps us better understand each other. we hope that more american students and teachers will come to china to experience the chinese culture and civilization. as i conclude my remarks, i wish to sincerely wish this forum will success. i also wish to say to you, are very famous cultural heritage, a geographical garden, a well- known place. there is a welcoming tree that

welcomes all the guests coming to the mountain. it has defined tough times and the weather, and it tells the whole world that china's people are real friends, ready to embrace the world and ready to work with all friends from afar, and we welcome you. [applause] >> governor, thank you for introducing us to your province. thank you for your commitment to the education of our children in both countries. that is our future. president who didn't tell him to visit the state of washington -- president hu jintao came to visit the state of washington, and as a result, we have

emphasized knowledge of china. thank you each for your presentations. we are out of time, but i do not want to take away from the opportunity, so madame li and i have agreed to limit the questions to two. . you're sorry sorry. we will rotate from one side to the other. if we could keep the questions short. orry.am sar we could keep the questions short, meaning no more than two or three minutes, because we would like the opportunity to take questions. i will ask if a u.s. governor has any questions you would like to pose, our host from the great state of utah, governor herbert. >> thank you. i think it has been enjoyable new mexico formative for all of us to hear the comments from the

presentations. i question is simply this -- we talk about we want to have better relationships with each other, to foster economic opportunities, and i just want to ask the question -- what is the obstacle that you see or the challenges which are going to get in the way of us accomplishing that? and mr. secretary -- >> mr. secretary. >> governor, you have raised a very good question. between, the exchange's us are based on a very broad basis. many examples where given by the previous speakers, and we value these exchanges and cooperation, but we have encountered problems

or challenges. i would have to say that even in a family, there is some displeasures or frictions, but as long as we properly handle them, we will properly resolved. as i said, if we have better communication and a better understanding, we will be able to address these differences. in terms of trade, the topic i was talking about -- in trade, we may face something, particularly difficult. for example, the barriers. trade barriers. or can we remove some of the barriers so that trade is done more easily? what did the americans need? what can we produce for the americans? we can look at all these demand

and supply and address these demand and supply. you can tell us what you need, and we can tell you what we want. i think these exchanges are very helpful for our corporation at the national level, and that is why i believe it is important that we need to make our policy is open and transparent and advanced power corp. in a wide range of areas. >> thank you. can i ask if one of our colleagues from china has a question they would like to ask of the governors of the united states? >> i have a question on education. actually, the institutions of higher learning have too your tasks. one is to cultivate talent, and the other is to do research and

development. after the students graduate from universities, they will come into the industrial sector, and the government has done a lot in assisting them, but how can we better translate the research results into real productivity? i do not know whether or not the united states has a similar problem. and what is your experience? we are very interested to learn from you. >> it is a constant challenge for all of us. we have a number of methods in which we are trying to join up education, jobs, research, and business. two of those -- one is our community college system, which is designed to have worker training directly contacting the

jobs that are there, so the people that employ people come to those schools, say what they need as far as workers. we customize that training right to them so that the workers are literally working that job before they are joining the business. on the research side, what we're trying to do is begin to get a series of innovation centers where research and then turning that into a business model touch each other. all of us in some way or another have incubation centers on our universities, which tied directly the thought processes and ideas to more capital for business ventures, but to say that we have this problem completely solved would be to overstate where we are. it is something that all of us spend a great deal of time trying to do much better.

>> governor, i have to join with my colleague and say this is a mutual issue for us. in my state, we have one of the largest numbers of start up companies in the united states. that is a nice reputation to have. you do not want to know how many fail. but we foster it because we believe only if you continue to push for startups in cooperation with your research institutions, will you have the opportunity to create the company's of tomorrow. we struggle with it. not only how to make the startups flourish and grow and be successful. so, thank you. last question from the american governor from the great state of hawaii. >> thank you. just a quick comment as a follow-up to governor herbert's question. two words -- visa waivers.

i mean it. i am very grateful to our guests for their courtesy and the polite and reflective way in which they answered that question, but it is up to us. visa waivers. we have these waivers, everything opens up. trade, conversation, education, environmental exchange, investment -- it all comes. it is up to us to make this reaction to the courtesy and openness of our chinese friends, and if we do that, i think you will see everything else opens up. these waivers. >> thank you, governor. [applause] >> do we have a second question from a u.s. governor? i will ask a question. i have done trade missions to china. i most recently did one last fall, largest in the history of my state.

i have some measure of what i consider to be success whether we have been able to sign an agreement like the 20 you signed yesterday. agreements not just with business, but with higher education institutions, but from your perspective, what would you like to see in a trade mission from an american governor to your province or to your country? >> just now, the governor raised the very practical question. we do want greater cooperation with the united states.

we hope that more american delegations will come to china, in particular to the western part of china, to the western provinces. we also hope that you will bring more investment to our provinces. >> last question from our chinese colleague. you have a question, as i understand it? >> we all know that the united states is one of the first countries to formulate a pv policy. then at launch a one-million grew initiative. china is immensely interested in developing the sector, so i really want to know what

measures you have taken to push forward the development of this sector. >> please, governor o'malley. >> first, we need to have a renewable portfolio standard. second, it entertains within a certain requirements [inaudible] and increasingly larger portions of energy from renewable sources. within that, we have a requirement for solar. and that is probably the most important thing that we have done is to create that predictability, if you will, and that car about within the middle portfolio standard that is now starting to inspire larger portable tape installation.

as far as the broader question of advanced manufacturing and how we inspire that here in our country, that is an issue that we are all wrestling with right now. on the demand side, we believe that the renewable portfolio standard as a solid way we have been able to see that industry take off a bit in our state. >> if i may add to what governor o'malley just said, in the case of pr, we have extremely attractive tax incentives, and we are part of the united states market. so whatever you produce in pr can be sold within the u.s.. that is something we are doing, and it is again extremely attractive tax incentives for the production of affordable tick and other technologies. in terms of the actual installation of this technology,

in our case, to jump-start it, we created the green energy fund. actually, the green energy fund, what it does is that we assist private sector investors that wish to develop wind and solar energy alternatives. we assist them, and they have to compete for the amount of money that is in that fund. every year, there is a competition. we just closed the last one. next year, there will be a new one. >> well, thank you. again, thank you to all of our participants, all of those who have come to join us today. it has been a wonderfully good exchange. it is a historic event. yesterday with the 20 agreements signed was a historical event. this has been productive, and i want to thank all of our

participants. i also would like to thank some special folks who made this first ever historic forum possible, which includes our host governor from the state of utah. thank you, governor herbert. [applause] joe louis from the state department. thank you for all you have done. [applause] the chinese embassy. thank you very much. ozzie madame li, mr. secretary, governors from china, our fellow governors from the united states, thank you all for all your participation, and, of course, a big thank-you to the staff, without mean, this would not have been possible, as usual. thank you very much for all you did. [applause] let me just say, we have a lot

of work to do. let's make hay with the sunshine. those involved in the press conference, could you please go immediately to grand ballroom be because we are late. [laughter] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> wrapping up this session of the national governors' association from salt lake city. we just heard from washington state governor, the chair for this summer's conference. we will have more events throughout the weekend. tomorrow afternoon o'clock 30, the session on remembering 9/11, protecting borders and communities. on sunday at 1:30, the closing session. you will also be able to find all the segments on line in their entirety at c-span.org -- online in their entirety at c- span.org. it >> this weekend, live from salt lake city, the nation's governors look at the net the -- lessons of 9/11, and the featured speaker talks competitiveness and the economy. look for live coverage saturday at 5:30 eastern and sunday at 1:30 eastern, the national governors' association this

weekend, online, on c-span radio and on c-span. >> i am interested in what i call disappearing america. america that may not be here 25 years from now. >> for 30 years, carol heiss smith has troubled the united states, document in the country through her camera lens. every photograph donated and available at the library of congress. all over story sunday night. as a prelude to monday's debut of c-span's original documentary, "the library of congress began that every weekend, american history tv on c-span 3 highlights the 150th anniversary of the civil war. this week, historians on the events that led to the april 1861 attack on fort sumter. live in two weeks marks the first major battle of the civil war, the battle of bull run, with 48 hours of civil war programming. the civil war -- every weekend on american history tv on c-

span3. >> space shuttle atlantis is on its final mission to the international space station. returning to earth july 21. president obama called the astronauts today and the crew also spoke to reporters from aboard the international space station. the atlantis crew is leading an american flag on the station that was flown on the first shuttle mission in 1981. >> let the record show that john has a smile on its -- his face. >> and let this, are you ready for the event? >> we are ready for the event. >> atlantis, please stand by for the white house. >> please hold for the president.

>> hello. hello? this is the international space station. >> this is president obama. who am i talking to? >> hello, mr. president. you are talking to the increment 28 crew and the crew of the space shuttle atlantis. >> that is funny, see, because i was just dialing out for pizza. i did not expect to end up in space. >> yes, sir, it is an honor and privilege that you took some time out of your busy day to meet with us. >> listen, it is wonderful to talk to you, and i appreciate you guys taking out the time from your mission. i always want to just let everyone know how personally prior i am of you and the amazing feats you guys are accomplishing in space. i was here in the oval office watching you guys take off last friday.

we are all watching as the 10 of you work together as a team to conduct space walks and manage experiments and do all the things that necessary to keep the space station humming. your example, i think, means so much not just to your fellow americans, but also to your fellow citizens on earth. the space program has always invited our sense of adventure and exploration and courage as you guys work in a really harsh environment, and i know that there have been thousands who have poured their hearts and souls into america's space shuttle program over the last three decades that are following this journey with special interest. to them and all the men and women of nasa, i want to say thank you. you have helped our country lead the space age, and you continue to inspire us. captain ferguson, i realize you are a veteran of previous

flights, but it must be pretty special to be the commander on the last flight of the historic shuttle program. >> absolutely, mr. president. just let me say on behalf of all the international partners aboard the international space station, we are all honored and privileged to represent our home countries in this multi-national effort. to answer your question, sir, yes, it is an extreme pleasure to be just a part of this fine crew who will represent our country on the final space shuttle mission scheduled for an undocking in just a few days and a landing at the kennedy space center in it little less than a week. >> i understand you guys are also doing some pretty important mission work up there. i understand there's something about the innovative robotic refueling mission demonstration. >> yes, mr. president, we have a piece of equipment on board

that is a technology demonstration unit for the special purpose dextrous manipulator to work to show and prove the technology to robotic with and remotely service satellites, and we are hoping that with the work we will be able to do with the test here of the space station will lead us to further advance our robot capabilities. >> that is terrific, and it is a good reminder of how nasa technology and research oftentimes has huge spillover effects into the commercial sector and makes it all that much more important in terms of people's day-to-day lives. i also understand that atlantis brought a unique american flag up to the station, one that was blown on the very first shuttle mission. and one that will reside [inaudible] until the american commercial space company launches

astronauts into the space station. >> yes, mr. president. we brought a flag that was flown on sds 1, and as a part of a special presentation, we will present that to the space station crew, and it will hopefully maintain a position of honor until the next vehicle launched from u.s. soil brings u.s. astronauts up to dock with the space station. >> and i understand it will be sort of like a capture the flag moment here for commercial space flight. so good luck to whoever grabs that flag. >> that is an excellent point, sir. we sure hope to see some of our commercial partners climbing on board release soon. i know there's a lot of competition out there. a lot of people are currently working with the goal to be the first to send a commercial astronaut into orbit, and we look forward to seeing them here soon. >> i also understand today marks

an anniversary of sorts for us and our russian colleagues. 36 years ago, we launched a u.s. apollo spacecraft and a soviet union capsule toward a rendezvous in space. is pretty exciting to know that american astronauts and russian cosmonauts are shaking hands 36 years later, but working every day to represent humankind coming together in space. >> yes, mr. president. our crew is very international right now. here are representative of three agencies, and we are working

together. we are more than just representatives of each country. we are one big family. now, the guys who got here almost a week ago share with us our brilliant international space station. >> it is a wonderful testimony to the human spirit. you need to be like a family because i'm assuming you have to share pretty cramped quarters and a bathroom. my wife and my daughters are always crowding me out. so, hopefully, you guys have a more organized arrangement then we do. that absolutely, mr. president. we actually have three bathrooms on board, and we have a gym. we have several bedrooms. it is probably one of the more spacious homes that there is outside of planet earth. the well, look, while this mission marks the final flight of the space shuttle program, it

also ushers in an exciting new era to push the frontiers of space exploration and human space flight people subject back -- human space flight. you will continue to operate the iss for coming years and seek to advance technology and development. our task nasa with an addition to developing new systems and kinds of space technologies that will be necessary to conduct exploration beyond earth and ultimately sending humans to mars, which is, obviously, no small feat, but i know we will be up to the task. i just want to say how proud i am of all of you. congratulations to nasa, to all our international partners and all the personnel past and present who have spent countless hours and i told efforts making the space shuttle and international space station a unique part of our history. so accept my gratitude on this tremendous accomplishment, and god speed as you guys return

home next week. >> thank you very much, mr. president. once again, on behalf of all the international partners on board, we are privileged that you took time to speak with us today, and we are honored to represent everybody on the planet earth. thank you, sir. >> you bet. take care now. >> thank you, mr. president. atlantis iss, we are now resuming operational audio communications. >> good morning. this is eric burger with "houston chronicle." congratulations on such a great mission. there has been a lot of talk about last during this flight,

and i want to talk about first. specifically, do any of the crew members plan to stick around with nasa, or is that something too far in the future? >> well, i think if you ask any of us, we would love a shot at flying another vehicle, so, definitely. and we have opportunities prior to that. we have multiple flights to the international space station. we are going to screw this beautiful complex for the next 10 years-plus. so there are plenty of opportunities to fly. i do not see any reason to not stay and see what happens. it is a real bright future. >> good morning. channel 13 here in houston. great to talk with you guys. i am curious -- what have you done in your downtime on this mission to make sure you capture

some of these last moments? what things have you made sure you saw out the windows or done with the shuttle? tell us about how you have spent your downtime. >> for me, i had a chance to look out the window, and we can see the southern lights. we all crowded around and got to see that. just savoring every minute. and once in awhile, when you are on atlantis, at the end of the day, you look around the deck and think of all the guys and women who were there before you and who had a part in the space program and you think, "wow, this is the last flight." >> box 26 here in houston also, and i am passing on a question from one of our viewers. she wants to know what will the astronauts be able to take from the last trip, and will you have a job when you get back on earth?

>> absolutely. you know, johnson space center, although we are reaching the end of the space shuttle program, is still a vibrant place to work. there will be a transitional time as we hand over a lot of the responsibilities to our commercial providers, but this is an opportunity for us to look beyond low earth orbit and perhaps back to the moon or to an asteroid and where we would like to travel too soon, so there will be plenty of work in the houston area. >> good morning. "aviation week." my question is for sandy. could you describe for us the pace of the activities the past week and just what it will take to wrap up before you on doc? thanks. >> the pace has been very busy, busy, busy. right when we hit orbit, doing post insertion with four people was really challenging.

we were working really hard right up to bedtime. we got a little head, but since we docked, we have been working quite a bit. i think we are getting ahead now, so hopefully, the rest of the pace of the mission will slow down a little bit and we can savor it a little bit more than we have been able to now. >> good morning. my question is for commander ferguson. having time to fly in space and spend time in the space station, you and your crew mates have a unique view of our planet. for those of us honor, i wondered what message you would have for why it is important to continue exploration, particularly manned exploration, beyond low earth orbit? >> i will tell you, first of all, you really do not get a firmer appreciation for what a fantastic place it is until you have had the opportunity to look out here over the last couple of nights, we have had some incredibly dramatic passes that showed the southern lights, just a vibrant green color, and there

was a tremendous picture taken last night with the silhouette of the international space station and the space shuttle in the background. and i will tell you, there is a little part of everybody who looks at something like that and says, "i cannot believe we are here." this is absolutely fantastic. we must continue the spirit and we must go beyond. we must go back to lunar orbit. we need to continue pushing on. we need to press technology. humans are destined to explore. this is what we do, and we need to continue. m at abc news. mike, we thought we heard you trying to whistle before your space walk on tuesday. tell me a little bit about that and why you could not whistle, and when you are done, i would like you to whistle a tone for me. >> i will pass the second half of your question to myspace what buddy. ron and i were both doing a little whistling in the airlock.

it is one of the strange phenomena were as the pressure is dropping in the airlock, our suit is just a little over four pounds of pressure, and once the pressure inside the airlock goes down to zero, your overall pressure is download. has to do with the density of the air, but i really cannot explain a lot about the visited frequency of the cavity of your mouth as you are going the air through it like that. it is kind of interesting. we can all whistle, and ron will do the tune, but it is one of the things that you could physically use to just take a look and appreciate the fact that things are changing. you can feel the air you are breathing in is different. it is a lower density, and you can tell that. we have a procedure car in the airlock, and you can wave that back and forth, and as you do,

you can feel less resistance on it as the air pressure is dropping. the whistling is just something else to have a little fun with while you try not to think about what is going on. ♪ [laughter] >> two-part question. since each of you has connections to consult -- has connections to person -- pennsylvania, what have you done for that state, and have you seen anything through the global and yet? >> first of all, how are you doing? i wish we had enough time to look out the window. we did catch a little bit -- a look at the philadelphia-new york area. i think it was the evening up like a two, and we've looked out. and have we passed up the east

coast of australia -- yes, we have, and that was one of the opportunities we had to look at the southern lights, but i did not have an opportunity to do a lot of coastal searching to find out where we were. i will turn it over to ron. >> well, sasha and andre and i have been here 101 days today, but who is counting? but we have had a lot of opportunities to look out the window, a lot of opportunities to see our unbelievably beautiful earth. yes, i have had the opportunity to see pennsylvania. i've taken some pictures of one of my favorite places in the world that is that the happiest day of my life over 20 years ago getting married in scranton, pennsylvania. definitely have some great pictures of that area. really beautiful area of pennsylvania. >> this is robert perlman with a question for wrecks. there is a tradition among shuttle crews to leave their marks, their mission patch on various walls of the space station. can you share were you and your crew members plan to leave your

emblem and will you be adding any other commemorative mementos or emblems to signify this is the last space shuttle to visit the iss? >> yes, they do have a place where we leave the patches and our stickers, and we are going to leave our patch probably in no one, and we should leave a sticker in the airlock because we consider ourselves one big team here, and we all executed the space walk. mike and ron the great guys went outside and did the space walk, but we all help them, so we would like to put one of our mission stickers in the airlock. with regards to other things we are leaving of year, do you have any other additions? >> yes, we do have a special item we are going to leave behind in what hopefully is a very thought-provoking and emotional farewell ceremony we have as the space shuttle prepares to leave the international space station for the final time.

i would just ask you to perhaps hold on until that moment, and you will get a look at what we have in store. >> atlantic iss, that concludes questions from the johnson space center. please stand by for a voice check from kennedy space center. >> this is kennedy space center pao. how do you hear me? >> hello, kennedy space center. we have you loud and clear. >> i was wondering if you could highlight some of the scientific experiments you are working on on the international space station that you think will particularly inspire the public back here on earth? >> that is an excellent question. we have had a permanent human presence on the international space station for over a decade, and over that time, we have conducted over 600 scientific experiments. one of the things we are trying to do is see how humans can go

further in exploration, go beyond earth a little bit, explore our solar system, but nearly all the experiments we cannot have a direct application on earth from crowing -- growing crops better to making new materials, new medicines. we had some very significant research in the development of a vaccine for salmonella, studying our earth, learning how -- learning about the human impact on the environment, how the inner core of the earth works, and possibly leading to better ways to predict earthquakes, better automobile safety, energy efficiency, fuel efficiency. the list goes on and on and on. it is just amazing the research being conducted out here, and that is because this is a very unique environment. the research being conducted of your simply cannot be done anywhere else in the world. that is why this is such an important research facility, and this is really a global asset, the international space station.

>> "spaceflight" magazine. my question is for kristen and your crew. i wonder if you could tell us a little bit about the science that you have personally seen going on at the space station. can you see the ams at all? and any interaction with the robot -- robonaut? >> absolutely. we had a great opportunity to see it out the window. matter of fact, on the first eda, the only, ron went out there to put another payload and had an opportunity to take a look around, and we had the chance to watch him. so it is out there, and we understand it is just doing fantastic science. >> stephen young with spaceflightnow.com there is a fear that this might

be the end of the space program in united states. do you have any fears of all that your crews might be the last to blast off from united states soil? >> it is a very dynamic time in human space flight. [inaudible] rest assured that there are plans under way. we will be slowly transitioning to commercial companies, and while it is a little personally disheartening to see the shuttle come, we understand that sometimes you need to stop working on what you are working on so you can afford to pay for the next generation of whatever is, and in this case, it is the next generation of aircraft. as a matter of fact, i think it is a unique opportunity, just like the airlines did several years ago. it was largely government-funded research that made tremendous breakthroughs in aerospace, only to hand it over to commercial companies in the form of

airlines. the government has made tremendous strides, and we're going to hand over to commercial providers, and perhaps one day we will have space line companies. >> irish radio today. not many europeans have flown on the spot -- i know many europeans have flown on the space shuttle, but sadly no irish. a lot of our younger listeners will be wary. will they ever have an opportunity to fly in space? do you have any reassurance for them? >> well, actually, i am a fair amount irish, and i am up here today, so we will call that good enough for now, and i guarantee you there will be an irishman on board a spacecraft in the not too distant future. i do not think they have anything to worry about. they are interested in space flight, just continue to study

hard. you never know what would come next. >> associated press with another question for commander ferguson. in houston, you described the overwhelming sensation the shuttle crews get when they paused at the base of the pad on launch day and look at the ship. i wonder if you could tell me what that moment was like for you last friday when you looked up at atlantis knowing that is the last shuttle launch? >> well, i will tell you, that is one trip that every shuttle crew has to make, and i think i speak for everyone who has ever flown on a space shuttle, to stand up for it at the bottom of a living, breathing the ago living -- literally ripping off the side of the external tank because of the condensation that forms from the extremely cold cryogenic fuels, it is wheezing, and you look at it, and my first commander looked at me and said,

"do you believe they are going to let us take this thing into space? with every subsequent crew i have been on, i have tried to share that revelation. it's incredibly on inspiring, and just like the pictures you see the next day, it is incredibly surreal to stand up next to it and know that in a matter of hours it will be orbiting the earth. >> good morning. cbs news radio. this is for ron. i have enjoyed following your tweets. i'm wondering what is the best place on station to watch the undocking and fly around? do you expect a food fight for the best view? >> we are going to do something a little different this time. our fly around is going to be a little different. i think we're going to have probably some good use in the modules on the russian segment. i think that will be the best bet. and there is a few of those, so we will take turns it there is a

conflict. >> james dean from florida today. another question for ron. this is the last time in a very long time we will see a crowd this big on the station. although you will continue to fly there for many years to come. will it seems smaller, less on perhaps when you do not get these occasional visitors? >> i think it will seem a little bit smaller, actually, because all the tons of cargo that have arrived from atlantis have filled this place up, so there is a lot less room for us humans. but that is really important. because we are outfitting the station to function for the rest of the decade. atlantis has really set us on the pace for doing that. we are going to miss these guys a lot. it has been really wonderful having them up here. it is nice to have visitors,

especially great visitors like these guys are. it will be sad when that stops. but we are going to continue on. this place is amazing. it is going to continue to function, continue to utilize in great part because of the great mission so far that these guys have conducted. >> cbs news. survey, you have hurt the u.s. reporters asked u.s. astronauts about the end of the shuttle and what might come next -- what do the russians think about that? when you talk about that the end of the shuttle, and this gap that is coming up and nasa's reliance on russia for transportation -- what do you guys think about that? thanks. >> for us, it is also very sad that no more shuttles will appear before the station. we were able to build the

station. of course, we would like to continue to fly with our friends, and we are ready to continue this exploration of space. david waters from space flightnow.com. you are the last shuttle crew to go up. kind of book and this for us and hellas for people listening to this how you want people to look back at the shuttle program. that one is for chris ferguson, please. >> well, you know, the shuttle is several milestones over the course of its 30 --

[no audio] they have to live it through the pictures and images and stories that the astronauts bring home. they did not get to see and touch and feel like we do with vehicles that go up and down like the space shuttle. so, you know, it is a sobering moment. but at the same time, we are incredibly overjoyed to just have had the space shuttle for 30 years. and to know that, you know, we had this ability to go to low earth orbit, and we are so much more comfortable here than we were just a short time ago, and we hope that continues on through our commercial space flight partners. >> chris, i'm so sorry to do this to you, but we lost your video downlink for the first 30 seconds of that answer, so if you could start the car again and cellist, when we look back at the 30 years -- i thought it was you did not like my question. but anyway, when we look back at the 30 years of the space shuttle program, what do you

want people to remember about the program? >> well, we do not have the date to blacks which up here. i wish we did sometimes. but, of course, we have the international space station to look back upon. if it were not for the space shuttle, the station would not be here, and it certainly would not be as large as it is. that large payload in the space shuttle that allowed the large diameter that you see are around us -- it allows us to sit 5 across in here. if it were not for the space shuttle, we would not be doing anything like that. of course, is the tremendous observatory's the shuttle has launched a route its use. hubble space telescope. the extra space telescope. plus, the space shuttle is really -- i do not want to say we have command of lower orbit, but we are so much more comfortable here, living and working day in and day out. we will look back at the space shuttle as a vehicle that just give us a regular access, and it

opened up low earth orbit so we can go beyond and learn how to live in areas perhaps in the lunar orbit, lower service or on an asteroid. and atlantis iss, that concludes questions from the kennedy space center. please stand by for a voice check from nasa headquarters pao. >> atlantis iss, this is nasa headquarters pao. how old you read me? >> we have a loud and clear on the international space station. >> ron, can you tell us a bit more about your site's activities on station, particularly any experiments you have been working on that will be coming back down on shuttle? thank you. >> well, that would take a long time to answer. we have been doing a lot of

science on board. as far as i know, i think the only -- well, there is a lot of human research. we are kind of the subject, and there is a lot of the science that will go down on the shuttle. we also have some spiders on board right now that are being studied. they are going down on the shuttle as well. we have been conducting experiments -- fluor experiments, crystal growth experiments, plant growth experiments, experiments with the function of the human body, looking at things like how to combat osteoporosis. there's quite a bit of science going on board. combustion science we have been doing as well. so we are at the beginning of full utilization of this amazing research facility. than an assetwatched.com for chris ferguson -- >>

nasawatch.com for chris ferguson. it must be tiring for you if you try to plan a career and stay motivated. he must be like a tennis ball at times. as we speak, you are floating off planet from the edge of tomorrow, literally. that is certainly an opportunity to gain a unique perspective and ability to be heard. what is it that we should be doing, really should be doing to explore space? what should policymakers in washington do? what should they stop doing? and i guess should we be boldly going somewhere? what would you say -- you are going to talk to the president in an hour and a half or so, but if you really wanted to say one thing to them, what would you say to afford the whole notion of exploring space for real? >> hello, keith, first of all, and thanks for the question. i will tell you, i do share a little bit of your frustration. we have had a lot of major programs -- vibrant and

interesting programs, come and go at nasa without coming to fruition. a lot of that is politics- driven. a lot of it is funding driven. a lot of it is due to finance -- events. like colombia. to answer your question, if there's one thing we could do to focus, if you will, efforts, it is to just appeal to congress to focus on the long term. look at the horizon. do not look one or two years in the future, but look at 10 years and see where you what this nation to be. i understand the president has a space policy, and i think that is fantastic, but we need to retain a coherent, meaningful space policy that will take us more than one in two years in the future, that will take us out to 10 or 15 years. the plan of where we want this nation to go in space and make it a lot to follow it.

perhaps congressional representatives, senators, presidential administrations are obliged to follow the policy that this nation set forth so we can chart out something that is 10 or 15 years in a destination and not just one two. and atlantis iss, that includes questions from nasa headquarters. please stand by for a voice check from marshall space flight center pao. >> atlantis iss, this is marshall space flight center pao. how do you hear me? >> we have you loud and clear. >> i wanted to ask -- much of the world was watching as you guys skyrocketed into space, excited, looking to see you. what was going through your head when that was happening? >> there are a lot of emotions

going through your mind. a space shuttle launch is a very interesting experience, kind of liked the year prior to the launch, you are preparing to the super bowl, but you do not know exactly what day it is. you get all prepared, and even on the date of the scheduled launch, you are wondering if you are going to go. this launch was no different. we had a 70% chance of not going, but we got prepared as if we were going. you walk out and look at this amazing vehicle on the launch pad, and nothing comes to your mind but -- "wow." you never know for sure if you are going until the last second. the funny thing about that is they pick up the town, and suddenly, they are ready to go, and we were off to the races. we were getting shot off the planet, and it was absolutely amazing. all right up, you are wide-eyed, experiencing the thrill of the g's and all the incredible sights and sounds you hear.

>> you guys are part of a very exclusive club on the last shuttle mission. what are some of london's view are relishing the most right now? -- what are some of the moment you are relishing the most right now? >> i think we are all relishing just the fact that we are in space again, able to float around, here on the space station, working with the crew, living in this environment, working hard to make this a better place to live and sustain it for the next year. it really is special being up here, and whenever we are up here, we just try to savor that as much as we can pirie whether you are on your first mission, your second, or this, the last mission. >> out of the brackets to become an city, i have been admiring your hair all morning. this question is for you, too. this is your second time up.

tell me the changes that have gone through the space station and how it looks now, and also, you have six days left before some crew members leave. is there anything you want to do before you fly back? >> certainly the space station feels a lot like home. the minute we open the hatch, i felt like i had never left. in the meantime, since i have been here, several new modules have arrived. the most enjoyable of which is the cupola, the very nice windowed module where we can see spectacular views of the earth. a couple hours after the break, we all ran up to see the view from there. the station is the same, but yet, it is different in some ways. a lot of the operations are the same. these guys have taken great care of it. as far as the remaining time, we're going to finish out our transfer and hopefully get that done a little bit earlier and have some time to spend just

with our station colleagues and share some memories before we have to leave. >> atlanta iss, that concludes questions from the marshall space flight center. we will rejoin you after a brief com dropout. atlanta iss, this is houston acr back with you. please stand by for a voice check from the ames research center. >> how do you hear me? >> we have you loud and clear. it is going to take us about another 30 seconds or so to get all set the camera view for you. that was probably the most entertaining thing you will see all day.

>> good morning. i am with nbc bay area, the home market of rex waldheim, so my question is for you, rex. what are your thoughts on the shuttle program coming to an end? what do you think legacy will be, and most importantly, were you able to spot your home town from outer space? >> to answer >> we did pass over california just in time as i was having a family conference with my wife and to voice. the bay area was a little bit foggy so i could not quite see san francisco, but it was spectacular to see some of northern california. the shuttle legacy, number one, it launched probes, it launched the hubble space telescope, and

the crown jewel is that it helped to build this magnificent international space station we are on right now. it would not be this size are magnitude without the space shuttle. hubble will still be taking pictures and are cremates here will still be doing research. that is the legacy of the shuttle which will continue to live on. as the shuttle is retired, that money will be available not only to continue the special research but to go beyond. we need to get back into the expiration where we are going to the moon or mars. >> this is matt biggert with kcbs radio. we are speaking to you from silicon valley, the home of google and facebook and things like social media and the iphone. i question is, what effect do you think some of these high- tech innovations have had on america's interest in space

travel and our ability to explore the final frontier. >> i think the technology has inherent interest, and i think silicon valley is a lot of the genesis of a lot of the technology we use here on the space station. place a very important role from inspiring grade school kids to providing the science we need to do our research here. i think it will always keep people curious, and curiosity as an important thing you need to be able to develop the space program and research programs that can pay incredible dividends here in space. >> i was wondering what you felt when you found out you are going to be on the last shuttle mission. >> like most of us, i was very honored.

i was not -- none of us were sure we would get another chance as they assigned to the last mission. we thought our chances had gone by. it was kind of like being at disneyland and the right clothes is just as you get to the front of the line. -- the ride closes just as you get to the front of the line. i was overjoyed to get a chance to come here again. >> good morning. this is for >>, our home town representatives. -- this is for rex. however all of these things helped shake as a person and lead you to ponder humankind's place in the cosmos? >> it is an amazing creation, looking at the earth. you cannot describe it.

we are all trying to continue the exploration of space, and one thing you want to do is make it more accessible to everyday people, to give everybody a chance to come into space one day. it changes your entire perspective. we have people from america, russia, and japan. we are all working together and we share problems and laugh and work together as one big team. when you look down to earth, it is of just one big planet. the better we can see that perspective, the better off we all will be. >> >> students from all over will get a chance to see you in space. what do you have to tell them? how do you inspire them to look to the future? how did they get into space? >> what i want to tell them is

number one, work hard, especially in math and science, and number two, have persistence. i can remember sitting in my backyard and looking ex the airplanes circling in waiting to come in to san francisco, and thinking i wish i get a chance to fly some day. we are 200 miles up. it is really a dream come true. just the simple things like floating and flying in zero gravity or absolutely amazing. everybody has those dreams were you can fly, and here you can actually do it. your dreams really can come true. >> that includes questions from ames research center. please stand by for a voice check from jackson.

>> we read you loud and clear. >> the iss which everyone is on board, i believe the space shuttle has made major contributions to the united states and it has continued to carry the japanese after not. the space shuttle will be ending and retiring. what is your feeling about retirement of the space shuttle? >> the space shuttle has brought

about hopes and dreams and also challenging spirit to japan as well as the japanese people. for the japanese as fronts -- astronauts, i believe the fact that i was personally able to welcome them aboard the last space shuttle is a great honor to me. it is regretful that the space shuttle will be retiring, but i believe it is a step toward the future programs. it will be a new starting point for future programs. i think the u.s. and american colleagues have a charming spirit -- challenging spirit, and i respect them very much for that challenging spirit. >> we are reading your twitter messages all the time. you say you have grown accustomed to zero gravity. have you experienced any changes in your physical or mental

condition? could you talk about it from a doctor's perspective as well as from an individual perspective? >> it is very difficult to make a distinction. what i feel interesting is that my senses, how i feel. you lose the feeling of being vertical or horizontal. wear your legs are located bills like is the floor. if you change your posture, then that place where your feet are located feels like the floor. i think that when we say the upside and downside, it is just for the sake of convenience. out in space, it is just in relative terms that you feel like you are upside down or the other way around.

>> another thing about the shuttle. you have flown on the soyuz, but don't you wish you had been on board the shuttle? >> they give for that very good question. in order to become a mission specialist, i wish i had been able to travel on the space shuttle budget can i get everything you wish in life. i am very satisfied. there are of the reasons for this. the first is that soyuz is a highly reliable russian space vehicle, and i was able to arrive at the iss and make contributions to the iss activity.

second is that i as a japanese astronaut was able to work on the last crew on board the space shuttle. also, the space shuttle atlantis, i believe i was the first to encounter atlantis and also the commander has made my wish come true, and he let me sit in his commander's seat and take a photograph, so that was a wish come true. >> probably have an opportunity to look at the disaster hit area. i wonder if you have an -- a message to the people who have been impacted in japan.

>> yes, i have personally travel to the area when i was a high- school student and i was very moved by those people who were very friendly people there. i have very good memories of visiting there, and four months have passed, at an things must be very difficult for them there. if we continue to do what you can do, today what -- tomorrow will be better than today. my colleague from here and russia and the u.s., everyone is very much concerned and they give good wishes. all the people in the world showing up in trying to be supportive, i hope they will keep on trying.

>> you have worked very hard for the last 12 years and you finally came to the space shuttle. did you encounter anything that you did not expect? >> most of the things were things i had been trained on. however, one thing i was surprised was that things do not stay on the surface because if you put something up on the table it will float out into space. we had to try to fix things on the surface. sometimes they float, and that was things that i was not

trained enough and and learning is here. >> you mentioned earlier -- i understand that you visited the space shuttle when you had a cold. how did you feel about that? >> when i went into the space shuttle, i felt that it really looked like the trading space shuttle in houston. it felt very much like trading in houston. it was exactly the same

environment as i had been trained in houston. i was very moved to hear the wake up call of music by elton john. i was very grateful for that opportunity that was given to me. >> i would like to hear about the world cup -- the women's world cup. you have a lot of american friends around here. >> it might be difficult to answer your question in this environment. all the athletes, supporters, all the people, of that everyone would do their best. that is my wish.

>> this is houston a cr. thank you, that concludes the event. >> kennedy space center, nasa headquarters, marshall space flight center, and is research center, and in japan. we are now resuming operational audio communications. >> today, huffington post editor in chief are yana huffington and tim armstrong spoke at the national press club. they discussed a merger of their two companies and the future of journalism. harrison portion of the event indeed here is a portion of the event. >> i happen to be in london when the scandal started, and it was amazing to see two things. first of all, how incredibly

irrelevant the debate between old media and new media is. they are an institution of old media, 168 years on paper. not an upstart blocker who did not have enough supervision, but an incredible institution of the british press that was acting in ways that would have been utterly disgusting coming from anywhere in the media universe. it was new media that played a huge part in bringing in the news of the world down so fast. it was amazing watching all that happened on twitter. within moments, it was getting thousands of tweets. advertiser after advertiser was leaving, and i stopped counting at no. 39 because i knew that was going to be enough, and it

was. at the same time, to see that that story was broken by another major institution, the guardian. it was broken at a time when the guardian had announced it was going to embrace a digital first strategy. it had completely embraced the new media, and broke the story by doing what new media does best, which says obsessively staying on a story. most publications had moved on. but the unique ability of new media is to stay on a story and doggedly stay on the story until you have an impact, until you break through. that is what the guardian did, demonstrating what i have always believed, which is that the picture belongs to those who bring together the best of old media, fact checking, accuracy, transparency, and the best of

new media, which is interactivity, engagement with the readers, and real-time provision of information. that was all demonstrated last week, and the story is still unfolding. one more thing that was demonstrated was that social media is about accountability. the reason why ultimately group -- rupert murdoch will withdraw his bid for british sky broadcasting, is because the last three leaders of major parties urged him to do so. they did not urge him to do so because they suddenly had an epiphany about news corp.. it was because of the pressure they are getting from social media and citizens everywhere. all that happened so fast. everything is accelerated in the brave new world of media. this is really why i am so excited about the fact that

social media, new media is all about engagement. patch is really about hyper local. we are now in 100 the towns across america -- 150 towns in america. we launched a citizen journalism initiative last week. within 48 hours we had 600 people signed up to be citizen journalists, bringing the news to all of you, bringing the local voices into the national dialogue, which is one of the things we are so excited about, being able to have a total of over 1300 professional journalist working with us, while at the same time being a platform that provides a

distribution channel to thousands of people, to blog about anything they care about. that is really the hybrid future we are betting on. professional journalists who have the best understanding of how to break a story and stay on the story, often entering younger journalists, and a platform with tens of thousands of people blogging publicly. it is really that universe that sometimes people in the mainstream media have trouble understanding because they do not quite see what has happened. self expression has for many people now become the new entertainment and a major social experiment. in the past, nobody ever wondered, why are people often watching bad television for hours on end and not being paid? did anybody ever ask that question?

but people are constantly asking, why are people updating with the pdf wi --kipedia entries? it misses what drives him in beings to drive certain things and did mrs. how much people now want to be part of the story of their times. they want to bear witness, and that brings me to my last point. i read a book by benjamin disraeli, who ended up becoming prime minister of israel. before he ran for prime minister, he needed to capture the imagination of people in his country to help them understand the social injustices that were going on.

you don't have to be on the left to care about social injustice. you don't have to be left to care about what is happening to the middle class. benjamin disraeli in 1945 is a novel to touch people's hearts and minds and to bear witness to what was happening in his time. today, new media are arming tens of thousands of people around the world to bear witness to why this is happening in their countries, to what is happening in their time. ultimately, bearing witness is the highest responsibility. we have our journalist -- barry gwyneth is the highest responsibility we have as citizens. we have never had greater opportunities to bear witness at a time of uprisings and at a time when millions of people are living lives of extreme deprivation. we should be grateful we are

living during this extraordinary time of transition, when all of us have the opportunity to bear witness. thank you. [applause] >> one thing i feel pretty assured of and that is the president is not going to get from congress the kind of plan that he wants, which is. -- as he repeated today would include a number of tax increases on individuals earning $1 million and up, and the elimination of other tax breaks. republicans are simply not going to vote for any plan that includes tax increases on individuals and corporations. i think that all to believe they might be able to go along with the elimination of specialized tax breaks for individual industries, but in terms of the kind of approach the president wants right now, it is not going

to happen. the votes simply are not there, not in the house and not in the senate. >> what can you tell us about what may be happening on the senate side. senator mcconnell introduced his so-called plan b, and then there is talk about that gang of six senators discussing a possible solution to this. what do you hear? >> another is consideration of both avenues there. senator mcconnell, the gop leader, introduced this as a sort of last plan, because in his view, default cannot be an option for two reasons. it could be calamitous for the economy, and he believes republicans would then share ownership for the economy with the president, and that is not something he wants going into 2012, when republicans are poised to take over the senate, if everything goes well. aside from the politics of it,

democrats did not dismiss it out of hand. harry reid said he would take a look at it as senate majority leader. i think it has possibilities. the gang of six, i do not have too much faith in terms of their ideas being adopted, because for months that have been working on a so-called grand bargain that would include a number of spending cuts, but also the elimination of several tax breaks and possibly other tax increases that will never make it through the house of representatives, let alone get through the senate. i think what they are trying to do is a very balanced policy approach. you have conservatives and liberals and often that, so these are very serious negotiations from a policy perspective. i don't think they have much political legs to get anywhere. >> republican leaders have insisted in almost every briefing in a balanced budget

amendment they have proposed. why is that part of the discussion now? >> it has been a part of what republicans have wanted for some time as these debt talks ramped up over the past several weeks. there is a group of conservatives in the house and senate, all republicans, that have signed this cut cap balance pledge, where in order to get their vote for raising the debt ceiling, a boat that they would prefer not to make, they want what they would call serious spending cuts, spending caps with teeth to prevent spending from going up faster than the rate of inflation, but to have those sorts of attacked with to it, and in a balanced budget amendment to the constitution. i don't think the president will

sign it even if it somehow miraculously did pass the senate. therefore i can see why they are pushing for it, if i can put myself in their shoes from a policy perspective, especially with a lot of the new members that won in 2010. it would force the government to live within a balanced budget structure, but again, it is similar to the gang of six negotiation. i do not think it has political legs. i don't think he can get out of president al -- out of congress -- i don't think he can get out of congress and land on the president's desk. anything is possible. right now, the problem is that they are really at a stalemate. i liken it to a negotiation over a piece of property or a house. imagine you have a seller who does not want to sell and the

buyer who does not want to buy, and yet somehow they are supposed to negotiate a deal to buy and sell a house. it would not go so well, and that is how far apart they are right now. what you need to look for is the idea that defaulting would be so calamitous that it creates energy to agree to something, and that could include the president backing down from his demand that there is a balanced approach that includes tax increases on people making over a million dollars, corporations, and things of that nature. it could include republicans backing down from their no taxes stance, but that is one thing that will not happen. they could agree to end tax breaks for certain industries and they could agree on a smaller amount of discretionary cuts to make it easier for democrats to be part of the deal. people are going to have to give somewhere. maybe they will just go with the

mcconnell plan because they do not want to default. as a source who has watched these talks closing yesterday, the idea that this could be a crisis has not really set in yet and a lot of the members considering how to vote have not been here during the midst of a crisis and do not understand what they are dealing with. if that is the case, you need to look for crisis to set in and that might spur people to look at different options. >> david drucker, thank you for that update. >> next, we'll hear from president obama as well as house republicans and democrats concerning the debt and deficit reduction talks. next, president obama talks about the ongoing negotiations between his administration and congressional leaders over ways to reduce the federal deficit. he said an agreement must be reached to keep the u.s. from defaulting on its loan

obligations and it should include revenue increases as well as spending cuts. treasury secretary tim geithner has said the federal government has until august 2 to raise the debt ceiling to avoid a government default. this is 40 minutes. >> hello, everybody. as you know, yesterday we had another meeting with congressional leaders. we are not having won today, so i thought it would be useful to give you an update on where we are. although congressional leaders have reiterated the desire to make sure that the united states does not default on our obligations and that the full faith and credit of the united states is preserved. that is a good thing picric we should not even be this close to a deadline on this issue. this should have been taken care of earlier, but it is encouraging that everybody believes this is something that has to be addressed. for the general public, i have said this before but i just want to reiterate, this is not some

abstract issue. these are obligations that the united states has taken on in the past. congress has run up the credit card and we now have an obligation to pay our bills. if we do not, it could have a whole set of adverse consequences. we could end up in a situation where interest rates rise for everybody all throughout the country. effectively, a tax increase on everybody, because suddenly, whether you are using your credit cards are trying to get a loan for a car or student loan, businesses that are trying to make payroll, all of them could end up being impacted as a consequence of default. what is important is that even as we raise the debt ceiling, we also solved the problem underlying debt and deficits. i am glad that congressional

leaders do not want to default, but the american people expect more than that. they expect that we actually try to solve this problem and get our fiscal house in order. during the course of these discussions with congressional leaders, what i have tried to emphasize this, we have a unique opportunity to do something big. we have a chance to stabilize america's finances for a decade, or 15 or 20 years, if we are willing to seize the moment. what that would require would be some shared sacrifice and a balanced approach that says we are going to make significant cuts in domestic spending, and i have already said i am willing to take down domestic spending to the lowest percentage of our overall economy since the eisenhower. it also requires cuts in defense spending. i have said that in addition to the $400 billion we have already

cut from defense spending, we will look for hundreds of billions more. it would require us taking on health care spending, and that includes looking at medicare and finding ways that we can stabilize the system so that it is available not just for this generation but for future generations, and it would require revenues. it would require even as we are asking the person who needs a student loan or the senior citizen or people, veterans who are trying to get by on a disability check, even as we are trying to make sure that all those programs or affordable, we are also saying to folks like myself that can afford it that we are able and willing to do a little bit more. millionaires and billionaires can afford to do a little bit more. we can close corporate loopholes

so that oil companies are not getting unnecessary tax credits or the corporate jet owners are not getting unnecessary tax breaks. if we take that approach, then i am confident that we can not only impress the financial markets but more importantly, we can actually impressed the american people that this town can actually get something done once in awhile. let me acknowledge what everybody understands. it is hard to do a big package. our republican friends have said they are not willing to do revenues and they have repeated that on several occasions. i hope that they are listening not just to lobbyists for special interests here in march and june, but they are also listening to the american people, because it turns out, many polls done by your organization show that it is not just democrats who show we need to take a balanced approach, many republicans do as well.

many republican voters think that any deficit reduction package should have a balanced approach and should include some revenues. it is not just democrats. it is a majority of republicans. you have a whole slew of republican officials from previous administrations. you have a bipartisan commission that has said that we need revenues. this is not just a democratic understanding, this is an understanding that the american people believe we should not be asking sacrifices from middle- class folks who are working hard every day, from the most vulnerable in our society, we should not ask them to make sacrifices we are not asking the most fortunate to make as well. i am still pushing for us to achieve a big deal, but what i also said to the group was, if

we cannot do the biggest deal possible, then let's still be ambitious. let's try to at least get a down payment on deficit reduction. that we can actually accomplish without huge changes in revenue or significant changes in entitlements, but we did still send a signal that we are serious about this problem. the fallback position, the third option, and i think the least attractive option, is one in which we raise the debt ceiling, but we do not make any progress in deficit and debt. if we take that approach, this issue is going to continue to plague us for months and years to come. i think it is important for the american people that everybody in this town set politics aside, that everybody in this town sets are individual interests aside, and we try to

do some tough stuff. i have already taken some heat from my party for being willing to compromise. my expectation and hope is that everybody in the coming days is going to be willing to compromise. last point i will make, and that i will take questions -- we are obviously running out of time. what i have said to the members of congress is that you need, over the next 24-36 hours, to give me some sense of what your plan is to get the debt ceiling raised through whatever mechanisms that can think about, and show me a plan in terms of what your doing for deficit and debt reduction. if they show me a serious plan, i am ready to move, even if the requires tough decisions on my part. i am hopeful that over the next couple of days, we will see this log jam broken, because of the american people, they understandably want to see

washington do its job. with that, let me see who is on the list. >> you have said that reducing the deficit will require shared sacrifice. we know -- we have an idea of the taxes you would like to see raised on corporations and on americans in the top tax bracket, but we do not know specifically what you are willing to do when it comes to entitlements spending. in the interest of transparency, leadership, and showing the american people that you have been negotiating in good faith, can you tell us one structure reform that you were willing to make to one of these entitlement programs that would have a major impact on the deficit? would you be willing to raise the retirement age? >> we have said that we are willing to look at all those approaches. i laid out some criteria in

terms of what would be acceptable. for example, i have said very clearly that we should make sure that current beneficiaries, as much as possible, are not affected, but we should look at what can we do in the out years so that over time, some of these programs are more sustainable. i have said that means testing on medicare, meaning people like myself, i am going to be turning 50 in a week, so i am starting to think a little bit more about medicare eligibility. [laughter] i am going to get my aarp card soon, and my discount. you can envision a situation where somebody in my position, me having to pay a little bit more on premiums or copays or things like that, would be

appropriate. again, that could make a difference. we have been very clear about where we are willing to go. what we are not willing to do is restructure the program in the ways that we have seen coming out of the house over the last several months, where we would voucherize the program and you potentially have senior citizens -- i view the social security and medicare as some of the most important programs we have. it turns out that making some modest modifications in those entitlements can save trillions of dollars, and it is not necessary to completely revamp the program. what is necessary is to say how do we make some modifications, including on the provider side.

i think it is important for us to keep in mind drug companies, for example, who are still doing very well through the medicare program, and although we have made drugs more available at a cheaper price to seniors who earn medicare through the affordable care act, there is more work to potentially be done there. if you look at a balanced package even within the entitlement programs, it turns out you can save trillions of dollars while maintaining the core integrity of the program. what i am not going to do is to ask -- let me put it this way. if you are a senior citizen and a modification potentially cost

you $100 or $200 a year more, or even if it is not affecting current beneficiaries, someone who is 40 today, 20 years from now is going to end up having to pay a little bit more. the least i can do is to say that people who are making a million dollars or more have to do something as well. that is the kind of trade-off, the kind of balanced approach and shared sacrifice that ought think most americans agree needs to happen. >> thank you, mr. president. i thought i heard you open up the door to this middle-of-the- road possibility. he said there should be a serious plan and then you are prepared to move. a few minutes before you came here, house republicans are going to be voting on a balanced budget amendment. is it dead on arrival, or does it short circuit what you expect in the next 24-36 hours? >> i have not looked at it.

i guess that's -- i think the house will vote on a couple of things just to make political statements, but if you are trying to get to $2.4 trillion without any revenue, then you are effectively gutting a whole bunch of domestic spending that is going to be too burdensome and not something that i would support. just to be very specific, we have identified over a trillion dollars in discretionary cuts, both in defense and domestic spending. that is hard to do. that requires essentially that you freeze spending, and when i say freeze, that means you are not getting inflation, so that these are programmatic cuts that over the course of 10 years, you would be looking at

potentially a 10% cut in domestic spending. if you then double that number, at that point you are taking a really big bite out of programs that are really important to ordinary folks. you are talking about students accumulating thousands of dollars more in student loan debt every year. you are talking about federal workers and veterans and others potentially having to pay more in terms of their health care. i have not seen it a credible plan, having gone through the numbers, that would allow you to get to $2.40 trillion without really hurting ordinary folks, and the notion that we would be doing that and not asking anything from the

wealthiest among us or from closing corporate loopholes, that does not seem like a serious plan to meet. the notion that -- a serious plan to me saying that oil companies do not need them to have an incentive to go out and make hundreds of millions of dollars, if we had not seen the other side even budge on that, i think most democrats would say that is not a serious plan. one last point on the balanced budget amendment. i do not know what version they are going to be presenting, but some of the balanced budget amendments that have been floating up their, this cut, cap, and balance, for example. when you look at the numbers, what you are looking at is cuts of a half trillion dollars below the right and budget in

any given year. it would require cutting social security or medicare substantially. i think it is important for everybody to understand that all of us believe that we need to get to a point where eventually we can balance the budget. we don't need a constitutional amendment to do that. what we need to do is do our jobs, and we have to do it the same way a family would do it. if a family gets overextended and their credit card is too high, they do not just stop paying their bills. what they do is, they say, how we start cutting our monthly cost? we keep making our payments but we start cutting out the things that are not necessary, and we do it in a way that maintains our credit rating, a way that is responsible. we do not stop sending our kids to college. we do not stop fixing the boiler or the roof that is leaking. we do things in a sensible, responsible way. we can do the same thing when

it comes to the federal budget. >> if you end up going to this middle-of-the-road package you referred to as the second option, would that have to have some sort of the stimulus -- >> i think both would be good for the economy. a payroll tax cut is something that has put $1,000 in the pocket of the typical american family over the of last six or seven months, and it has helped offset some of the rising costs in gasoline and food. i think that american consumers and american businesses would benefit from a continuation of that tax cut next year. unemployment insurance, obviously unemployment is still too high. there are a lot of folks out there who are doing everything they can to find a job, but the market is still tight out there. for us to make sure they are able to stay in their homes

potentially or able to still support their families i think is very important and contributes to the overall economy. there are ways that you can essentially take a little over one trillion dollars in serious discretionary funds, meaningful discretionary cuts, and then start building on top of that some cuts in non health care mandatory payments, ethanol programs, how we calculate various subsidies to various industries. that could potentially be added on, and we could still do something like a tax cut for ordinary families that would end up benefiting the economy as a whole. that is not my preferable option. i think about this like a layer cake. you can do the bare minimum, and then you can make some

progressively harder decisions to solve the problem more and more. we are in a position now where if we are serious about this, everybody is willing to compromise, as i said before, we can fix this thing probably for a decade or more, and that is something i think would be good for overall business climate and would encourage the american people that washington is willing to take care of its business. >> you are saying there are measures that would be good for the economy that need to be included for you to sign? >> i have to look at the overall package. i do not know what the speaker or mr. mcconnell are willing to do at this point. >> this has gotten kind of ugly in the last week, and it appears that things even gotten futile at these meetings.

any regrets in your role in this? >> this notion that things got ugly is just not true. we have been meeting every single day, and we have had very constructive conversations. the american people are not interested in the reality tv aspects of who said what, and did somebody's feelings get hurt. they are interested in solving the budget problem and the deficit and debt. that may be good for chatter in this town, but it is not something that folks out in the country are obsessing about. with respect to bowles-simpson, it would not have happened had i not set up the structure for

it. as you recall, this was originally bipartisan legislation that some of the republican supporters of decided to vote against it when i said i supported it. that seems to be a pattern i am still puzzled by. so we set it up, and they issued a report. this provides an important framework to begin discussions, but there were aspects of it that i said early on were not the approach would take. i will give you an example. on defense spending, a huge amount of savings on the discretionary side came from defense spending. as commander-in-chief, i have to make sure we are cutting it in a way that recognizes we are still in the middle of a war. we are winding down another war, and we have a lot of veterans we have to care for as they come home. what we have said is, a lot of

the components of bowles- simpson, a lot of the recommendations we have taken. others, like on offense, we have taken some but not all of the recommendations. the bottom line is, this is not an issue of salesmanship to the american people. the american people are sold. [unintelligible] >> you have 80% of the american people who support a balanced approach. 80% of the american people support an approach that includes revenues and cut its. the notion that somehow the

american people are not sold is not the problem. the problem is, members of congress are divided ideologically into various positions because they boxed themselves then with previous statements. this is not a matter of the american people knowing what the right thing to do is. this is a matter congress doing the right thing and reflecting the will of the american people. if we do that, we will have solved this problem. >> i wanted to ask about the two trains that seem to be rolling down the track down the hill. later mcconnell has laid out an elaborate plan to raise the debt limit. he says it will be paired with the new committee that would be tasked with coming up with the big solution you talked about by the end of the year. your comment on that proposal. meanwhile in the house, you are saying we can be flexible in

our demands of we could get a balanced amendment. is there any way that could be part of a solution? >> first of all, bba means a balanced budget amendment. i think i already addressed this question earlier. we don't need a constitutional amendment to do our jobs. the constitution already tells us to do our jobs and make sure that the government is living within its means and making responsible choices. this notion that we are going to go over a multi-year process instead of seizing the moment now and taking care problems is a typical washington response. we don't need more studies. we don't need a balanced budget amendment. we simply need to make these tough choices and be willing to

take on our faces. everybody knows it. we could have a discussion right now about what the numbers look like, and we know what is necessary. here is the good news. it turns out we don't have to do anything radical to solve this problem. contrary to what some folks say, we are not greece or portugal. turns out that our problem is we have cut taxes without paying for them over the last decade. we ended up instituting new programs like a prescription drug program for seniors that was not paid for. we fought two wars and did not pay for them. we had a bad recession that required a recovery act and stimulus spending and helping states and all that accumulated, and there is interest on top of that. to unwind that, what is required is that we have to

clean up our tax code so we are not giving out a bunch of tax breaks to companies that do not need them and are not creating jobs. we cut programs that we don't need and we invest in those things that are going to help us grow. every commission that has been out there has said the same thing. ball approach within the margin of error. my general view is that the american people looked at this, they would say some of these decisions are tough, but they do not requi us to cut medicare or social security. they do not require us to stop helping young people go to college.

they do not require us to sto helping families who have a disabled child. they did not require us to violatobligations to our veterans, and they don't requireob killing t cuts. they require us to makeome modest adjustments to get our house in order, and we should do it now. with respect to senator mcconnell's plan, it is constructive to say that if shington operateassual and cannot get anything done, let's at least avert armageddon. i am glad that people are serious abouthe csequences of defaults, but we have two problems here. one is raising the debt ceiling. this is a problem that was manufactur here in washingt, becau every sine one of the leaders over there voted for raising the debt ceiling in the past and it has

typically been a difficult but routine process. do have a genui underlying problem that our debt and deficits are too big. senator mcconnell's approach solves the first problem. it ds nosolve the second problem. i would like to solve that second problem. >> are you looking at this option as one likely outcome at this point for can you share with us why there is some hope that the talks that have been goinon might actually produce them? >> i always have hope. don'you remember my campaign? [laughter] even after being here 2.5 years, i continue to have pe, because of the american people.

there is still good, common sense. all we have to do is a line with that common-sense on ts problem and it can get solved. i am assuming that at some point, members of coress are going to listen. a number orepublican former elected officis would say a balanced approach that includes some revenue is the right thing to do. the majoty of republican voters say that approach is the right thing to do. the proposal that i was discussing with speaker boehner fell squarely in line with what most republican voters think we should do. so the question is, at what point do folks over there start listening to the people who put

them in office? now is a good time. >> good morning, mr. president. i faintly remember your campaign and i'm guessing that while it hasn't been ugly, as you say it's not what you had in mind when you said you wanted to change the tone in washington. when you had senator mcconnell -- going forward, if you can get a deal on this, can you get anything done with congress for the next year and a half? >> well, let me say this. and i'm not trying to poke at you guys. i generally don't watch what is said about me on cable. i generally don't read what's said about me, even in the hill. and so, you know, part of this

job is having a thick skin and understanding a lot of this stuff is not personal. that's not going to be an impediment. whatever senator mcconnell says about me on the floor of the senate is not going to be an impediment to us getting a deal done. the question is going to be whether at any given moment we're willing to set politics aside at least briefly in order to get something done. i don't expect politicians not to think about politics. but every so often, there are issues that are urgent that have to be attended to and require us to do things we don't like to do. that run in contrary to our base. that get some constituents that helped elect us agitated because they're look at frit a narrow prison. . we're supposed to be looking at it from a perspective of what's good from the country. if we are able to remind

ourselves of that, then there's no reason why we shouldn't be able to get things done. look, we've been obsessing over the last couple weeks about raising the debt ceiling and reducing the deficit. i'll tell you what the american people are obsessing about right now is that unemployment is still way too high and too many folks' homes are still under water. and things they need, not just that they want, the prices are going up a lot faster than their paychecks are, if they've got a job. so even after we solve this problem, we've still got a lot of work together. hans was mentioning we should renew the payroll tax for another year. we should make unemployment insurance there for another year. >> [inaudible] >> but you were making the point whether or not that issue could be wrapped into this

deal. my point is that those are a whole other set of issues that we need to be talking about and working on. i've got an infrastructure bank bill that would start putting construction workers back to work rebuilding our roads and bridges. we should be cooperating on that. most of the things that i've proposed to help spur on additional job growth are traditional bipartisan. i've got three trade deals ready to go. and these are all trade deals that the republicans told me were their top priorities. they said this would be one of the best job creators that we could have. and yet it's still being held up because some folks don't want to provide trade adjustment assistance to people who may be displaced as a consequence of trade. surely we can come up with a compromise to solve those problems. so there will be huge differences between now and

november 2012 between the parties. and whoever the republican nominee is, we're going to have a big, serious debate about what we believe is the right way to guide america forward and to win the future. and i'm confident that i will win that debate because i think that we've got the better approach. but in the meantime, surely we can every once in a while sit down and actually do something that helps american people right here and right now. >> it's in the meantime, sir, that i'm curious about. raising the debt ceiling is fairly routine, but it's to the point of economic armageddon. if you can get past this one, how can you get any agreement with congress on the big issues you talked about? >> i am going to keep on work and keep on trying.

and what i'm going to do is to hope that in part this debate has focused the american people's attention a little bit more. and will subject congress to scrutiny. and increasingly the american people will say to themselves if a party or a politician is constantly taking the position my way or the highway, constantly being locked in to ideologically rigid positions, that we're going to remember at the polls. it's kind of cumulative. the american people aren't paying attention to the details of every aspect of this negotiation, but i think what the american people are paying attention to is who seems to be trying to get something done? and who seems to be just posturing and trying to score political points? and i think it's going to be in the interest of everybody who wants to continue to serve in this town to make sure that

they are on the right side of that impression. and that's, by the waying what i said in the meeting two days ago. i was very blunt. i said the american people do not want to see a bunch of posturing. they don't want to hear a bunch of sound bytes. what they want is for us to solve problems. and we all have to remember that. that's why we were sent here. last question, scott. >> thank you, mr. president. i wonder if you've seen any sign of daily meetings that republicans are being more aligned with that america majority, or if we are in the same place today that we were on monday? >> it's probably better for you to ask them how they're thinking. i do think that -- and i've said this before. speaker boehner in good faith was trying to see if it was possible to get a big deal done.

he had some problems in his caucus. my hope is that after some reflection, after we walk through all the numbers this week and we looked at all the options, that there may be some movement, some possibility, some interest to still get something more than the bare minimum done. but we're running out of time. that's the main concern that i have at this point. we have enough time to do a big deal. i've got reams of paper and printouts and spread sheets on my desk, and so we know how we can create a package that solves the deficit and debt for a significant period of time. but in order to do that, we've got to get started now. and that's why i'm expecting some answers from all the congressional leaders sometime in the next couple of days. and i have to say, you know,

this is tough on the democratic side, too. some of the things that i've talked about and said i would be willing to see happen, there are some democrats who think that's absolutely unacceptable. and so that's where i'd have a selling job, chuck, is trying to sell some of our party, that if you are a progressive, you should be concerned about debt and deficit just as much as if you're a conservative. the reason is if the only thing that we're talking about over the next year, two years, five years is debt and deficit, then it's very hard to start talking about how do we make investments in community colleges so that our kids are trained? how do we actually rebuild two trillion dollars worth of crumbling infrastructure? if you care about making investments in our kids and making investments if our infrastructure and make

investments in basic research, then you should want our fiscal house in order so that every time we propose a new initiative, somebody doesn't just throw up their hands and say oh, more big spending, more government. it would be very helpful for us to be able to say to the american people our fiscal house is in order, and so now the question is what should we be doing to win the future and make ourselves more competitive and create more jobs and what aspects of what government is doing are a waste and we should eliminate. and that's the kind of debate that i'd like to have. all right. thank you, guys. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

>> next, house republican leaders tell capitol hill reporters that the budget they passed earlier this year would put federal spending on track to avoid the government defaulting on its obligation. they also said that the obama administration has not yet put forward its own plan. this is just under 15 minutes.

>> just in case anybody missed it, last night moody issued a new statement about the debt limit. the debt limit raised again. however, it would very likely be changed to negative. at the conclusion of the review unless substantial incredible agreement is achieved on a budget that includes long-term deficit reduction to sustain a stable outlook, it should include a deficit trajectory that leads to stabilization and then decline in the ratios of federal debt to g.d.p. and debt to revenue beginning within the next few years.

rough translation, there is no more road left to kick the can down the road. we have a debt crisis, not because the debt ceiling is too low, but because the debt is too high. it is spending-driven. our president and the previous congress has been on a spending binge. if they want an increase in the debt ceiling vote as the speaker has said, they have got to cut up the credit cards, they have got to have the president -- the president needs to put a plan on the table. not a speech. we cannot estimate a speech. we can only estimate a plan. it is time for the president to put his plan on the table. >> all yearlong, we've let on the big issues that are facing our country. the house passed budgets, they're written by paul ryan

and the budget committee, i think set the standard for serious debate. we've passed or pushed for bill after bill that would create jobs by easing the burdens of regulations, expanding exports and increasing the supply of american energy. in the government debate, our goals are real simple. no one wants the united states to default on our obligations, but we won't see real economic growth without a serious plan to deal with our deficit and our debt. yesterday at the white house, secretary geithner echoed both of these points. our stand on the debt limit has been clear. there can be no tax hikes because tax hikes destroy jobs. we need real spending cuts, and real spending cuts that will exceed the amount of increase in the debt limit. and we need real reforms to restrain the growth of spending in future years.

like spending jobs and like a real balanced budget amendment. listen, we're in the fourth quarter here. time and again, republicans have offered serious proposals to cut spending and address these issues. i think it's time for the democrats to get serious as well. we asked the president to lead. we asked him to put forward a plan. not a speech. a real plan. and he hasn't. we will. >> good morning. there's been a lot of talk, a lot of reporting about what's gone on in these discussions at the white house surrounding the debt sealing. and so let's just take a step back for a second and look at where we are. as the speaker indicated, the house put forward its budget and the house passed its budget. that is our vision. if we were in control of washington, we would be trying to push our agenda through both

houses and to see if that could be implemented. we called for $6.2 trillion in cuts over 10 years. in the current discussions at the white house, the president and the democrats are offering perhaps $1.5 trillion. the number keeps moving. but perhaps. that's a big difference. so the talk or some of the reports have indicated that somehow republicans haven't given. now, i just tell you that's not true. we're at $6.2 trillion. they're at $1.5 trillion at best. and that's just the way it is. and so what we want and what we said is, as the speaker continues to put out there, we want to change the system here. we want to be able to go home to the people that elected us and show them that we're not going to allow this kind of spending to continue. we don't have the money, they don't have the money.

we need to get the economy growing again and to control spending here in washington. so we're going to bring a bill forward next week otherwise known as the cut cap and balance bill to provide a balanced approach so that we can demonstrate that we are getting things under control and that the people who put us here can gain some confidence that we're going to begin to live like they do around their kitchen tables and in their businesses, stop spending money we don't have, and begin to manage this debt deficit down the balance. we hope that our democratic friends on the other side of the aisle can join us in that balanced approach. >> as the speaker and leader just said, they reemphasized what the first half of this year has been all about. when you look, there's no greater contrast when you look at two sides. the president did produce a budget, but didn't even get one vote. not even one democrat vote.

the house produced a budget, took it out of the house, and moved it forward and talked about real serious issues. the leader said more than six trillion dollars in cuts. talked about job creation. an energy policy for america. the speaker and the leader have sat in room after room, meeting after meeting trying to put america on to a path to actually pay off their debt and imagine a future of growth. we just walked out of a very strong conference. next week, the republicans again will show that they can lead. we welcome every democrat to join with us. but we will take the bill out of the house. and if you've ever questioned whether republicans can do it on their own, they will. but this is an opportunity that people can join together. like a path that is different than what we've seen in the future. a path that can build jobs, build a strong america, and not leave this debt to the next

generation. >> for months now, the president has been asking to raise the debt ceiling $2.4 trillion to get us through the next election. just to put that into perspective, we're talking $20,000 in additional debt per american family. so every american family in america is being asked to shoulder another $20,000. we believe that it's very important that any increase in the debt ceiling be accompanied with spending cuts and changes, reforms in the way the federal government spends money. our conference, the house of republicans are united around a balanced budget amendment. 49 out of 50 states have to balance their budgets. the real question is whether or not the president recognizes that there must be a game-changer. that there must be a change in the way the government spends money. i am pleased too that we're moving forward on cut, cap, and

balance. it's our plan, our serious plan to get us back on track. >> the american people know that big changes are needed here in washington. i'm proud to stand with the leadership who represents a united conference that understands and has been listening to the american people. that there are short-term, mid-term, and long-term solutions that have to be put on the table. next week we will propose short-term solutions with decrease in spending. mid-term solutions that will cap the amount of spending coming out of washington and long-term solutions that will embrace a balanced budget amendment that the american people support. and thereby get the job creation and get this economy back on track. it's a great opportunity for this congress and america. >> mr. speaker, does this mean that you think the white house talks are basically coming to a close and won't produce any agreements? >> i don't want to preclude any

chance of coming to an agreement. but they've been unwilling to put a real plan on the table. and without serious spending cuts, without real reform by our entitlement programs, this problem is not going to be solved. >> there are reports emerging that a plan combining senator mcconnell's plan, some other elements are coming together as a possible resolution. is that what you're prepared to embrace and put forward? >> i am not prepared at this point to pick winners or losers. listen, senator mcconnell pointed out that his plan was being put on the table as a last-ditch effort. we're far from the time for a last-ditch effort. >> my understanding is that the debt increase would be contingent on the balanced budget amendment. since you know it -- do you

accept it has any more traction? >> i would be hopeful. i always remain hopeful. >> the democrats in the house have already indicated the provisions on taxes and raising the debt ceiling. even if all your members vote for it, it seems like it's dead on arrival in the house. the taxes and the debt ceiling, is there any wiggle room on that or is that set in stone? >> listen, the cut cap and balance plan that the house will vote on next week is a solid plan for moving forward. let's get through that vote and then we'll make decisions about what will come after it. >> you met with jay powell who laid out a very detailed description of what exactly would happen on august 3 with the debt ceiling. many members of your caucus have said that they don't think the debt ceiling will need to be raised at that point. has this presentation changed your mind? >> that i don't know, but i

thought that we had a very good conference this morning. there was a lot of very solid information provided to the members, and the analysis provided by the bipartisan policy center frankly closely followed a lot of information that's been developed by the joint committee -- joint economic committee. i think the information was very helpful to members. >> speaker boehner, do you get the sense that your members might be more open to something like mcconnell if it includes spending cuts in it? >> i'm not going to answer a whole lot of speculative questions. and i don't need to repeat my often-said monotra, but maybe i should. if and and butts were candy and nuts, every day would be christmas.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> shortly after the republican news conference, house democrats met with members of the media to voice their support for president obama concerning the debt negotiation. this is just under 20 minutes. >> just waiting for the rest of our leadership to arrive. we'll proceed in this order. i will speak, mr. becerra will follow and we'll go right down

the line of our leadership. but thank you for being with us this morning. i'm sure you're all aware by now, democrats, led by cedric richmond, carried the day yesterday against republicans. we think this is foreshadowing things that are going to come in the future. we had a caucus in which we heard from the leadership participating with the president. our caucus focused on the continued support for our president and the fact that he has been the leader at the table, continuing to want to meet, continuing to want to work out a solution. this caucus stands behind him because we know that in those meetings he's out there protecting the core values of not only this caucus, but of the american people, especially as it relates to medicare and social security and medicaid,

which have been important to our caucus. we continue to encourage our leadership to be there and seek the best possible deal in the fairest american way. failing that, our caucus believes that there should be in lieu of the events that are taking place and unfolding economically around us, a clean vote on the debt ceiling, but continue to stay and work on what this caucus believes is the most fundamental thing facing america, and that's job creations. we have not seen a single piece of legislation from our opponents on the other side as it relates to jobs. we're focused on innovation and making it in america, and that's what we will continue to support. and with that, let me turn it over to our vice chair. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me give a shoutout to a different team. in a few short days, the

women's soccer team for our country will once again make us very proud. win or lose, what they have proven is that we are moving forward and we're doing this together. here in washington, d.c., we could take a few lessons from the women's soccer team because win or lose, we do this together as a team. democrats continue to stay at the negotiating table. we are convinced that the president is trying to do the right thing by getting a long-term solution. and we should do this as a team, not as republicans and not as democrats. this is about doing it together. and so if we're going to do this together, it's got to be a balanced approach. and the president has made that very clear. so we're ready to work together with our teammates, the republicans, to get this done for the american people, both in terms of not defaulting on our debt, but also making sure we get our fiscal house in order. with that, let me turn it over to the leader, nancy pelosi. >> thank you very much. to both of my colleagues, the

chairman and the distinguished vice chairman of the caucus, yes, team work pays all. it did last night for the democrats in the baseball game and for the women's soccer team. we're very proud of both of them. i'm very proud of our house democratic caucus. i wish that all of you could have heard the knowledge, the values that they are bringing over and over again to this discussion most currently this morning. we stand with the president of the united states in the hope that we could have a grand bargain that takes us well into the future with deficit reduction. i remind you that it was only a week ago that we were hopeful that this could happen in a bipartisan way. thursday wi left the meeting. we left the meeting with some spirit of cooperation that we could work on a grand bargain. a great deficit reduction so that we could move on to job creation.

friday, we were working on that. saturday, the republicans walked away from that. and since then, we've been trying to find out if that's still possible, and if not, what is possible. whatever is possible, it's not possible for us to reduce the deficit and create jobs on the backs of america's working families. so we continue to say to the president congratulations, we're proud of the work you're doing, and we're glad it does not reduce benefits for medicare and social security beneficiaries. it doesn't mean we're not open to initiatives that will strengthen those medicare and social security that will cut costs and keep them solvent for a longer period of time, but we are not reducing the deficit on the backs -- and give tax cuts to the wealthy on the backs of our social security and medicare recipients. when i came to the table two days arc i brought with me the priorities expressed to me by a

large number of students that came to my office the other day. they said we know the deficit is not good for our future. we all stand ready to help reduce it. everybody should participate in that. we want to -- we hope you won't diminish the prospects we have for college education. we want you to know how important medicare and medicaid are to our families that enable them to allow us to go to college by taking some of the fear out of health care costs for them, and of course, if you're young and you're in college or you're newly graduated, jobs, jobs, jobs. they're important to you. so don't do anything that impede the economic growth. their wisdom, so clear. but what we saw at the table was an attempt by the republicans to increase the cost to students by over $30

billion without taking one red cent of sacrifice from the wealthiest people in our country, for corporations sending jobs overseas, tax subsidies for big oil. so, again, our caucus focused on our priorities, which are based on our values. we support our president for the grand bargain. we hope that that can still happen and we know that it will happen, whatever happens, we will not be reducing benefits >> thank you very much, madam leader. time is short. the stakes are very high. the american people expect us to do what has been referred to.

i do not have the faintest idea to on the american women paltry soccer team is a republican or democrat. they are of the diverse races, nationalities, and regions -- and religions, but they are united in an effort to win for america. that is what this congress and this president need to do. the united in gaining a win for america. what does that mean? it means, in the first instance, not walking out of the room, not watching their hands and saying, "we are going to proceed in a unilateral fashion." we are going to present a bill we note cannot pass the united states senate. it is too late to continue to

play partisan games. we need to come together. that is why the leadership of this party has supported our president in saying that we need a comprehensive response to the debt, deficit -- debt-deficit that confronts us and we need to ensure that america does not default on its obligations. americans do not expect our great country for the first time in history to default on its debt. therefore, i have told john boehner that our party stands ready to ensure that we do not default on our debt, number one. i believe that almost every member of our party, if not every member of our party, would vote on a clean extension to make that happen. then we are also committed to making sure that our economy

grows and that we adopt a comprehensive plan that will ensure jobs will make it in america, that we will grow our economy so that we get the jobs to those people who are looking for jobs and the jobs for themselves and their families. this is a serious challenge that confronts us. the president of the united states has been meeting for four days to work with our republican colleagues to make that happen. america expects that. as we see our soccer team united, let us hope that the congress of the united states can come together in a bipartisan fashion to confront the growth of our economy, the assurance that america does not default, and the addressing our

long-term deficit and debt challenges. thank you very much. now i yield to the assistant leader. >> thank you very much, mr. whip, madam leader, mr. chair, vice chair, and ranking member. i want to add my voice to those here, not only on behalf of the country and making sure that we do not default. i think there is a thought that i am not aware of where it originated. i first heard it enunciated by then vice president hubert humphrey. when he said that our nation is judged by how well we protect those who are living in the twilight of their years, our

seniors, and how we treat those who are in the dawning of their lives. and i think that in these negotiations we need to make thee that as we solidifiy country as a nation, that we also protect those men and women who have given so much to bring us to where we are and make sure that they have some dignity as they live out their lives with the assistance of medicare, medicaid, as well as their children and grandchildren, who must have opportunities to have a good life in this great country of ours.

that has been the hallmark of our negotiations. i am very proud of the fact that we stayed at the table trying to seek resolutions into a very important matter. we are doing it in such a way that our children and grandchildren will be proud and we do justice to the legacy of those who brought us to this point. with that, i yield to ranking member of and holland. >> thank you, mr. clyburn, and my colleagues. thank you for your leadership. in the last several days we have seen some good news and some bad news. the good news is that a wake-up call has been sent to those people who were deluded enough to think that if the united states defaulted on its debt it would not have very serious consequences for our economy and jobs. for a while there were people

who would say that secretary geithner is making this stuff up. it is not real. well, is standard and poor's making it up? is moody's making it up? is the u.s. chamber of commerce making it up? defaulting on our debt, not paying america's bills for the first time in history will have devastating consequences for the economy. it is absolutely irresponsible for people to continue to take the position that it is okay for the united states not to pay its bills. the bad news was, unfortunately, we just heard from the republican caucus. because i heard the speaker say two things that were in conflict. on the one hand he says he still wants to get a big agreement -- a big agreement to try to address the deficit in this country and other issues. that is what we want.

that is what the president of the united states wants. but what the speaker of the house said in the same breath is you cannot close loopholes -- corporate loopholes in the tax "-- tax code. you cannot get rid of the loopholes that reward companies for shipping jobs overseas. that you cannot ask the oil and gas companies to no longer take taxpayer subsidies. that is what he said. every bipartisan group that has looked at this issue -- simpson bowles and every other group -- say you need a balanced approach to get something done. that is what the president wants to do. in the same breath to say you want to get a big comprehensive plan and at the same time say you want to protect special interests loopholes in the tax code is, i believe,

irresponsible. what is their answer that will bring before the house? the plan to end the medicare guarantee. sentencing is they have to go to the higher insurance market where they will have to pay more. i was just and with this point -- ronald reagan was a strong conservative, but ronald reagan said that there were important ties for compromise for the good of the country. the debt ceiling was raised 17 times when ronald reagan was president. as former senator alan simpson said, when push came to shove, reagan agreed 11 times to a package that included revenue. for the good the country and for the good of compromise. unfortunately, that is what we are not seeing now. on one hand, let's get a big bargain. all the other hand, setting traditions that make it impossible because the number

one priority is not reducing the deficit, the number one priority has been protecting the special interest here in washington. let's change that. >> we have two minutes left. we apologize. >> the backup plan -- if you cannot come to an agreement, is there a viable way to avoid this? you do not know the details at this point? >> no. >> madam leader, cut cap and balance? >> we will talk about that later. we want to see what that is because we just heard about it. the balanced budget amendment was a trojan horse. i have to go see it.

we know of that and what was introduced by the republican senators. thank you. >> thank you. >> the top of the debt negotiations came up on the house floor as members or wrapping up for the weekend during a colloquy between majority leader eric cantor and minority leader steny hoyer. this is about 25 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will yield back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from maland. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for his information. i would say that it's my understanding now that we are, as the gentleman has pointed out, we are going to be meeting on monday and will be voting on monday at 6:30 rather than commencing on tuesday at 6:30. the gentleman has pointed out that that's to accommodate the challenge that confronts us in the crisis that have been

put in with reference to assuring, a, that the -- america does no default on its bills and that we continue to pursue efforts to bring the deficit down and the debt under control. i say to my friend that it is late, he's right, we shouldn't confront this situation. we have on numerous occasions, of course, both the gentleman and i have voted in the past to extend the debt limito that america can pay the bills that it has incurred. the gentleman also notes that a piece of legislation was brought to the floor to ensure we pay our bills. it was brought to the floor with expressed intentions by the chairman of the ways and means committee that it be defeated and, of course, it was all defeated and all your members voted against it. though half of my members voted

to make sure we pay our bills so we do not get to this position. the gentleman and i have been involved in efforts to reach agreement with the president, with the senate and with ourselves, with both sides of the aisle so we can not only provide with america's paying its bills, which if it doesn't will have very serious consequences to every household in america, 401-k, pension program in erica, and the gentleman and i agree and everybody at the table with the president agreed allowing america to default on its bills was not something that any of us believe was a policy that was appropriate. i say to my friend the cut, cap and balance act, we've been confronted wh this challenge for a long period ofime.

it was my understanding that ou were to -- going to bring to the floor next week a balanced budget amendment which was announced and which i thought was coming and which we had told our members was coming. you have now constituted for that, as i understand it, am i correct, the cut, cap and balance act? my understanding is there is no text of that act available at this time, is that accurate? is there no text available for that bill? i yield. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman. mr. speaker, i'd say back to the gentleman that the bill is currently being drafted and will be posted online later this evening. consistent with our three-deleover requirement. i yielback. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for his comment. given the facthat this is, as the gentleman pointed out, this crisis has been known for us

for over five, six months now that we were going to confront this. i understand that in the cut, cap and balance pledge that has been future forward -- i don't know whether it's going to be put forward in the legislation -- but the pledge says that your side or the people -- excuse me -- people who signed the pledge, whater side they're on, are going to oppose any debt limit increase unless all three of the following conditions had been met. one, cut substantial cuts in spending that would reduce the deficit next year and thereafter. seems to me that we passed a budget through this hse that does that. it doesn't reach balance, of course, until some 30 yes from now. but secondly it says as a condition for voting for debt extension that unforcible

spending cuts will put it ona path toward a balanced budget. we had discussions in the white house onuts and what they apply to, a percentage of g.d.p. or the absolute caps in spending which obviously escalate denegation of the ability to deliver services over the years, depending upon the flexibility that's incorporated. i have not seen the legislation, of course. and then thirdly, a balance, and then pa rent -- parenthesis, not near support. i guess they will not vote to make sure america pays its bills on august 3. congressional package of a balanced amendment to the u.s. constitution but only if it includes both spending limitations and a supermajority for raising taxes in addition to balancing revenues and expenses. now, i presume that that

requirement will have to come, according tohis pledge, to get votes for which -- included this cut, cap and balance requirement. does the gentleman believe that the second to ateast -- one could argue we've already de the first in terms of me substantial cuts and we discussed agreeing on making substantial cuts but that the second two conditions cannot possibly be met between now and august 2? i yield. mr. cantor: mr. speaker, i'd say to the gentleman, as he has heard me say before in those meetings and on this floor, i don't want to pass august 2 without increasing the debt ceiling. mr. hoyer: i understand that.

i thank the gentleman. mr. cantor: i understand the's a lot of uncertainty if that were to happen, a lot of risk associated with that, risks i am not willing to take. but to the gentleman's discussion that it is imperative that we do that, above all else, i'd also addo thait is imperative that we demonstrate that we can arrive at meaningful solutions to the current fiscal crisis the country is facing. that is what the cut, cap and balance act tries to achieve. it offers a way for us to cut spending in a meaningful way this year and throughout the budget window. it also suggests ways to enforce discretionary levels so that congress can actually begin to do what all of us

would like to see us do which is to stop spending the money we don't have. the cut, cap and balance act also provides for caps on total spending levels recommended in our budget resolution. these levels are spending as a share of g.d.p. it provides, lastly, for ensuring that even beyond the 10 years that we actually can get back to balance. that's what the people of the country wants. i know the gentleman shares the desire to have this back down to balance. so i'm hopeful that the gentleman and his colleagues on the other side of the aisle take a look at this legislation, as i said tohe gentleman, it will be posted online to coly with our three-day layover requirement

and have it posted to members and the public. mr. hoyer: i'm not sure you answered my question to conditions two and three of the cut, cap and balance pledge or, again, i haven't read the legislation. i see the pledge. i'm not sure what's in the legislation. i thank the gentleman for his observation that we need a meaningful and i would say robust addressing of the problem that confronts us. as a fact, as you know, because we discussed it, at the white house for four days now, from sunday night through last night, i guess five days, the president of the united states has been indicating that w need a -- he calls a big, a grand design, if you will, along the lines that have been suggested by two of the

commissions which on a bipartisan basis recommended a grand design. that grand design would have reached at least $4 trillion of deficit reduction, debt reduction, and in fact that is a figure somewhere closer to the budget that was passed through this house. i'd say to the gentleman parenthetically that the cut, cap and balance budget may be closer to the number you referred to. i am talking about the amendment that was defeated on this floor by one vote. but i'd say to the gentleman, the president wants to do a grand design to reduce that deficit, not by $1 trillion or $ trillion or -- $2 trillion or $3 trillion but by $4 trillion. there was a commission on which -- a group -- the bide group we call it in which the

gentleman participated. there were other discussions between your speaker and the president all looking at achieving a large deficit redtion. the gentleman at some point in time decided that was not something he wanted to continue working on and suggested that it be, i suppose, pushed up the line and it was. so the president was for a grand design. the leader of the senate, mr. reid, was for that. mr. durbin was for it. ms. pelosi was for it. i was for it. the vice president was for it. but unfortunately we couldn't proceed on that discussion in a successful way, at least, because the gentleman observed and his colleagues observed that as long as there were any revenues attached to that it

would not be acceptable to your side of the aisle. notwithstanding that, every bipartisan commission that has dealt with this issue has indicated that it needs to be a balanced package, that it needed to include substantial cuts, t needed to deal with discretionary spending, defense spending, entitlement spending and it needed to deal with tax expenditures. the gentleman says correctly that we want to balance our revenues with our expenditures. the problem is if you keep cutting revens you are just going to be chasing yourself down. oiously you want to bring revenue rates down. i hope we can do that, but if we bring them down to a place where we don't have the money to pay for our -- what we buy which is of course what happened in this past decade, then we will be confronted with a situation the gentleman wants to avoid and that is raising the deblimit. what we have done over the last

10 years is buy more than we can afford and therefore we have a debt. that's why the gentleman, as i say, voted for extending debt limits. that's why i voted for it. i tell the gentleman that i have a gallup poll that says 6 -- 74% say it should include both tax increases and spending cuts and 77% of independents believe the plan should include a mix of revenue and spending cuts. i sathat so that i i can elicit from the gentleman, i know there's sentiment from this side of the aisle, there is sentiment from your side of the aisle, and the president believes this as well, we have an opportunity, a critical time in our history when we have the makings of a bipartisan

agreement, a bipartisan consensus that will move us in the direction that you and i know we have to more. and what is holding us up, as i understand it, is that your side believes that these 77% of independents, 74% of republicans are not correct, that revenues ought not to be part of this package. clearly we agree and have agreed that spending cuts need to be part of it. so i ask the gentleman, is there any possibility that these 74% of republicans are correct that in fact if we're going to have a successful package it will be because it is balanced? because my view is, i tell my friend, that if we do this it's going to really help create jobs. we have not done any jobs bills, we believe, in this congress.

we believe any jobs bill you did so far w a patent bill. i know you are going to talk about a these bills youid, but we don't think that because you put jobs in the title it makes them a jobs bill. . the fact of the matter is if we can create confidence in the markets, if we could create confident deps that we can deal with oufiscal situation in a responsibility, bipartisan, collegial way, it will have an extraordinarily positive effect on every household in america. the confidence of america that we can work together in a bipartisan way and will stabilize the market and provide for our paying our bills and bringing our deficit and debt down. so i ask my friend, again, does he believe there is any possibility at this point in time that we can reach a balanced agreement on what is called a grand design along the lines of the bipartisan commission's recommendations?

mr. cantor: does the gentleman yield? mr. hoyer: i certainly yield to my friend. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman. mr. speaker, first of all i would say regarding the gentleman's discussion about what happened at the white house this week and my insistence that the president's at least statents in that meeting, because we don't know what the details were of his proposal and the so-called big deal, my insistence was consistent with our speaker's, that we not raise taxes. and tt's why that construct doesn't work. we don't have the votes on this side of the aisle. i'm not supportive of raising taxes on people who are trying to make it right now and can't. so i would say to the gentleman when he refers to the other groups that have been out there, all of whom he say suggest that somehow we need to raise taxes, what the geneman's talking

about is how are we going to produce more revenues? we believe, mr. speaker, that you produce more revenues by having growth in our economy. we don't believe that you promote growth in the economy by cranking up the government spending machine by taking money from people who eastern it, washing it through washington's bureaucracy, and sending it back out. we don't believe that. we believe that growth is created through investment, through hard work in the private sector. by entrepreneurs, small business men and women, people who want to succeed but want to earn their success and are no waiting for government to grant it to them. so i say to the gentleman, if the aim is for us to create more revenues, one word in rponse, it's growth. i would say to the gentleman as far as his reference to the gallup poll and when he says

that overwhelmingly people in this country want to have taxes raised as part of the so-called solution to our problem -- mr. hoyer: would the gentleman yield on that? mr. cantor: i would yield to the gentleman when i'm finished. yield back when i'm finished. to the gentleman's suggestion that that's where the american public is, i just disagree. i haven't talked to anybody right now when we got unemployment over 9% officially. when people are out of work and month after month can't find a job. when small businesspeople are having -- business people are having trouble keeping the lights on, i don't talk to anybody that says please raise my taxes. so that's what we should be focused on are the hardworking people, the people of this country, who want a job. who want to see this economy return to growth. they are the ones who understand that it's cutting taxes, it's

cutting the overly burdensome regulatory system in this town that will bring back middle class jobs. and so to the gentleman's suggestion that somehow we have not been talking about jobs in this institution, i know it's t surprising to him that i disagree with that. mr. hoyer: it's not. mr. cantor: i say to the gentleman, week after week we brought bills to the floor, yes, that deal with our fiscal situation, that cut spending. because we've got to address that. just like people address it in their homes, their families, their businesses. but we brought numerous bills week after week to the floor that go to the root of the cause of uncertainty in the business community in this country and that is washington's overly aressive and burdensome regulatory reach. we have got to get back to a growth posture, mr. speaker. and that means cut spending, lower taxes, and implement a

balanced and sensible pro-growth regulatory system. as well as finally hopefully returning to a monetary policy that promotes a strong dollar. i yield back. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding back. first of all of course i didn't say, i don't think anybody wants their taxes raised, including me. i'd like to have all the prices for things i buy cut in half. 50% off sale. we all like that. i like going and using my credit card. so much easier. that's why credit cards encourage the economy. but you and i both know what happens when you use your credit card. at some point in time you get a bill. and the people who sold you the good or loaned you the money expe you to pay them. and i will tell my friend that i understand what he's saying.

we have just come through arguably the worst recession that we have experienced since the great depression. and it was consistent with economic policies, which by the way started as you know in december, 2007, in which we lost eight million jobs. but the gentleman continues to say he wants policies which in 1991 and 1994 were argued were policies, we are going to grow our economy, expand jobs, and have those folks that you talk about do well. i ask the gentleman, he misrepresents our position. i want to make it very clear. we are not for asking people who are trying to make it in america , we are not for asking those who are struggling in america, we are not asking for those who rely on social security, we are not asking for those who rely on

their medicare benefits to pay the burden of the spending th we have been involved in over the last decade which took us from $5.6 trillion of debt to over $10 trillion of debt. we are not asking for those struggling americans which the gentleman raises as the specter of those we think ought to pay their fair share. oh, no. we are asking for those who have done extraordinarily well over the last decade who have made millions per year over the last decade. some billions of dollars over the last decade. oil companies who are now making the biggest profits they ever made. and others to pay a little more so that we can stabilize the finances of america. so don't represent that it's democrats who are asking those

struggling small business people we are not doing that. or those struggling working people in america who, by the way, have been stuck in the mud under the economic policies that were pursued consistent with the 2001 and 2003 economic programs. which has seen a growing disparate between working people and the wealthiest people in erica. now, we can continue on that path and put on the backs of those struggling people you talk about, my friend, the responsibility to pay for things , or we can have a fair and balanced program. that's what the 74% in the gallup poll want. they don't want their taxes raised. what they want is a fair and balanced obligation. a fair and balaed participation in contribution. to paying the debts of this country. that we have incurred, we have incurred them together. ou are not all responsible. we are not all responsible. our side of the aisle as you

well know, this deficit was increased almost 90% under the bush economic policies. far le than that under t clinton economic policies. about half. but that's not the issue. both the debt went up, we are confronted with it, we got to pay it. you and i believe not paying it is not an option. the chamber of commerce says clearly that they urge all of us first it is critical the u.s. government not default in any way on its fiscal obligations. the president of the united states and our side has said, you bet. we don't want to do that. so let's ask all of us to come to t table and those who can't afford it ought not to be asked. but those who can, those who can shld be asked to do so. not to penalize them but to say we are all in this together. and those who ar best off in america, those corporations like

the oil companies who are getting subsidies at this point in time, who said they didn't need subsidies if oil was over $55 per barrel, they testified in congress some years ago to that fact. it's been twice that and we are still giving them subsidies. all we are saying is that doesn't make sense. and we ought to have a balanced program. that's what those 74% and 77% of independents are saying. they are not saying they want their taxes raised. they are not saying we ought to raise taxes and incur more debt. they are saying we ought to pay our bills. they are saying we ought to have a fair participation by all americans in meeting this crisis that confronts us. i would hope that over the next three weeks that we could get to a place where we come together in a bipartisan way and ask all of us to participate. and those who can can help us

confront this, bring this deficit down, balance our budget, and those who can't but who are working hard to make themselves and their families live a quality of life, we'll help them out. and i think as i said i'm going to stabilize the economy, grow jobs, and we'll have a better country. i would hope we could do that, mr. cantor. i'm looking forward to it. again i don't know that this cut cap and balance will get us there, and as i said we are not going to get there clearly under those provisions between now and august 2 and i think the gentleman knows that and i hope he has some other thoughts in mind, some other plan in mind obviously there have been a number of plans talked about at present in a speech about hs plan. that was rejected. the gentleman says it wasn't specifically line by line.

that's right because it was rejected before we got there. mr. boehner, your speaker, discussed trying to get a construct. so perhaps you have a plan that is above and beyond the cut, cap, and balance act that we might see that wod be a balanced plan and that would help us. if the gentleman wants me to yield, i'll yield. no. i yield back the balance of my time. >> next, christine gregoire and dave heineman at the national governors' association in salt lake city. after that, president obama and the debt and deficit reduction talks. tomorrow on "washington journal ," the economy and job creation.

dan friedman discusses a federal gun tracing program known as operation fast and furious and its impact on border states. from the national governors' association meeting, we will talk with the vermont governor about his state's health care program. the push for renewable energy and the economy. "washington journal" live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> i am very interested -- america that may not be here 25 years from now. >> for 30 years, she has traveled the united states document in the country through her camera lens. every photo donated and available at the library of congress. all over story -- followed her story sunday night at 8:00.

>> governors from the u.s. states and territories are in salt lake city this weekend for a summer meeting of the national governors' association. this year the focus is on the role of supporting education, promoting innovation, and increasing competitiveness. christine gregoire and dave heineman met with the media shortly before the formal proceedings began. >> we have on my left the governor from rhode island and from the great state of south dakota. we are here representing

approximately 32 governors that will be attending this conference in some form or fashion over this weekend. as we get together, the association -- my name is gary herbert, governor of the great state of utah. we have a great setting and a backdrop as the what i wrote -- as we look out at the salt lake valley. this is a spectacular view. i do not know was that is what he envisioned when he came into the valley in 1847. this valley has developed in a significant way and we are proud of our community here. we have not hosted the national governors' association since 1947. it has been about 64 years since we have had this great opportunity and things have changed a bit. for example, alaska and hawaii

were not states when we last tested. we are pleased to welcome them to the union. [laughter] an opportunity to host them and they will be your participating, too. i will just mention a comment that it is a great opportunity for us to host the governors. i am a big believer in the importance of the states and governors getting together having the opportunity to discuss issues of importance to their states and collectively for the nation. it has been a proud tradition of governors to get together in a very bipartisan way and talk about the issues of the day embark from each other best practices, find out what is going well in other parts of the country and trying to adopt some of those best practices. what are some of the challenges and see if we can help each other to overcome the challenges that we face as states.

the association is a very good forum for that. we have four provincial governors from china. emblematic of the fact that we all face what is a global market place in the economy. we have to look outside of our own borders now as we have opportunities and necessity to compete in a global marketplace. we have some special visitors and we will talk about economic development, jobs, with our friends from china as we have two great nations coming together in salt lake city for this weekend. i will conclude my part and state that what is not changed over time is the governor's commitment to promote visionary state leadership, share best practices, and to speak with a collective voice on national policy.

as we all understand states to be laboratories of democracy, we have opportunities as the experiment and work together to do good things, to find innovative and creative solutions to some of the challenges of the day. i am proud to be the host governor. i know utah welcomes from across this great land and literally across the world to this great event. we are pleased to be the host. with that, let me turn some time over to our great chairman, gov. christine gregoire from washington state. [laughter] [applause] >> good morning, everyone, and thank you. i want to give a big thank you on behalf of all the nation's governors. for such a warm welcome. a big thank you to the both of you for doing everything you

can to rollout the hospitality of everything that you've got here. it is an effort, i know, that you have done everything you can to ensure that our governors and their guests have the opportunity to experience the great state of utah. at the same time, giving the nation's business done. i also want to acknowledge our vice share. he will speak about some of the speakers that we are delighted to have joined us over the next three days. i've had wonderful working relationship with the governor. i admire his dedication to this great state of nebraska and to the association. i can say without a doubt that it has been a pleasure to work with dave heineman. ours has been a true partnership during some very difficult times and i am very grateful for his leadership. we have to business meetings a year. -- two business meetings i year.

one that is held in february and one that is held in the summertime. we are excited to have all of our colleagues join us here in utah. this year has been filled with many challenges. we have been asked to do more with less. people are struggling to make ends meet at home. state finances are just now starting to recover. we have not yet recovered in full and we still have to make some very tough choices while investing in our future so that we have an economic future that is second to none. many of us and our citizens have endured natural disasters and times have been truly hard. the governors are called upon to lead it through these challenging times. as governors, we all face very similar situations. many are often very similar. for example, whatever challenge i might have been the state of

washington, i feel very comfortable calling up my vice chair, dave heineman, to say, have you experienced this? sharing best practices of the national governors' association, which is a wealth of information to all governors about how we can use best practices going on in other states. with the challenges that these governors are facing comes great opportunity and we have the opportunity now to share our experiences, to share our institutional knowledge. we have 29 new governors. that is historic in the history of the national governors' association. different perspectives, these forces are joined, there is no limit to what we believe we can accomplish. the theme for the next three days is that education is our path to good jobs and to economic success for our future. economic growth and job creation

continue to be the top priorities for virtually every governor across the nation. we will find ways to create jobs for those who need them, strengthening our economic means, making sure that more of our residents have the skills for the 21st century. some of them are losing jobs that they will never be able to return to. we need to make sure they get the opportunity for new skills, new training. higher education is an economic engine in each of our states. this great university is an example. we must find ways to support education. it is the underpinning of our economic future. by fostering innovation, even in these tough times, we will let aipac for the future of our great nation. -- we will lay a path for the future of our great nation. it is essential with our universities partner with the private sector. when we do, there is nothing but those to -- two cannot accomplice.

we must be clear that what our states need from our colleges and universities and we must hold them accountable to deliver, delivered to our taxpayers, to the students, and to those businesses that need that work force. as the chair, i've been privileged to work on behalf of the nation's governors on these issues. as we have proven time and time again, we are much more effective when we act together through a bipartisan way. each governor has their own initiative. my initiative is what they call complete to compete. it is focused on the urgent need to increase college completion and productivity in the united states. they have to go on and gets a certification or an apprentice ship. yesterday they were going to be satisfied with an aa, hopefully, they will go one gets nba. -- ba.

we want to encourage them to go back and get the degree. two-thirds of the jobs will require an advanced degree beyond high school. a typical program or other credentials. at present, our country is not prepared to meet the work force demands of tomorrow. the u.s. has fallen from first in the world to 12th to students that are completing degrees. by 2013, 7 million degrees behind. you may think we have got unemployment at over 9%. we also had jobs that are on fell today because we do not have the skilled work force to -- to fill those jobs. to ensure that our citizens are prepared to compete, we must

develop sound policy that enable more individuals to complete the degrees and increased the efficiency of our higher education institutions. i believe we can and we must improve higher education performance. we must identify promising state policies as a first step to retaining excellence. together we can work to increase the number of college graduates and ultimately increase our nation's ability to compete internationally. i want to thank my colleagues for their participation and their insight during this initiative process. much of what we will discuss over the next session today, i am looking forward to the next three days. the unique bipartisan structure of our association enables us to put politics aside, to cross party lines, and to have good solid conversation with our colleagues from across the country to develop innovative and improved approach to

governing. governors do not have a choice. they are having to balance budgets, making tough decisions, having to lead to the future. only if we work together, stepped our partisanship aside, work together, can we set a path forward for the united states. that is the purpose of the next three days. i am very encouraged by our attendance. it is now my pleasure to introduce our vice chair, the governor of the great state of nebraska, dave heineman, who walked the little bit of our schedule. [applause] >> good morning. thank you very much. let me start by commenting on the relationship between the governor and myself. we have had an extraordinary partnership and i have learned a lot from her.

it has been an enormous privilege to come -- to become better acquainted with her. in true bipartisan. , we did not know it was going to happen, the university of nebraska played the university of washington during football season. we won that game. we had to play the university of washington again in a bowl game. we decided to let the university of washington when that game. as a result, i sent her a number of omaha steaks and i want you to know that we have thoroughly enjoyed our relationship. i think that is what governors do every do in the state house regardless of our party identification. we try to work together to solve our issues. i know the next three days of be very productive. the meetings are an opportunity for governors to have discussions about real solutions

to the challenges that we face. nga is an important bipartisan off -- organization that brings the governors together to discuss policies on a range of critical issues and to share information on emerging trends and innovations in state government. we focus on issues common to all states during this meeting. education, innovation, and competitiveness to just name a few. three governors-only sessions will provide a candidate forum for in-depth discussions. our standing committees will meet to discuss policy proposals that will be considered by the full association at sunday's closing session. our work begins shortly. today's opening session, higher education, catalyst for economic growth, will focus on the vital role universities play and nurturing innovation and economic growth to collaboration and engagement with the private sector.

we will be joined by a the president of mit and a visiting scholar at the university of southern california and former chief scientist. later this afternoon, in a unique exchange will take place during the united states-china governors forum. saturday's business agenda begins with a special standalone session of the economic development and commerce committee that includes a discussion about international trade and investment's role in job creation. following the session, the governors will meet with members of their respected standing committees. the health and human services committee will look at the insurance implementation issue. the natural resource will engage in a discussion on job creation and the energy sector. the education, early talbott and

work force committee will discuss leveraging higher education to increase u.s. competitiveness. a special committee on homeland security and public safety will focus on remembering september 11 with a discussion on protection of our borders and communities. the annual meeting will conclude sunday morning with a session on the global challenges facing america today and the role education plays and u.s. competitiveness. new york times columnist and pulitzer prize-winning author tom freedman will join us for that session. we have a full agenda and my colleagues and i are eager to get to work. we want to thank you for joining us here in salt lake city and we want to thank the governor and his wife for hosting us and for the extraordinary job that they are already doing. we are now prepared to answer your questions. [applause] >> can we take your questions?

>> what is your feeling about [inaudible] >> let me tell you how i feel about what is going on in washington, d.c. out across the nation, we can ill afford the debate that is going on. we are at a fragile state of recovery. the fact that we are not moving forward to solve the debt issue is resulting -- i can tell you in my own home state. consumers are not buying goods. businesses that have the money to hire are not hiring because people are concerned about this. it is time we put this issue behind us. it is time we got on with the issue that is confronting every american. do i have a job? but i have a job tomorrow? at the end of the day, i believe that we have to have a

balanced solution. we need to make sure that we have trend everywhere we can. -- trimmed everywhere we can. that we have looked at tax loopholes. i do not want to see this recovery born on the back of the poor and middle class. the point i am making, get on with it. i walked into my legislative session in january. i have a democratic house and a democratic senate and dime the democratic governor. i said to them, for get your partisanship. no bickering. bipartisan. it the job done. it was historic. they got the job done. that is what is necessary in washington, d.c. >> there was a pledge -- is he

wrong? >> every individual governor makes his own decision. i respect the opinion of every individual governor. it is not a pledge that i will take. >> given the fact that you've already spoken about how this is a bipartisan organization, you take a very different approach than -- if this is bipartisanship at work and you have such a wide disagreement here, how can you. the divide? >> justice last saturday, in a very bipartisan way, we send a clear message to the leadership of the house and senate and in ministration. that is that if you are talking about cutting medicaid $100 billion, let's share with you what the consequences are to the

states. will you take us to the brink of another recession? will you do it on the backs of the poor? work with us. we want to help you to be able to address the nation's debt problem. we do not want to do it if you do not understand what the consequences are in the states. we made it clear. this idea of a blending for a decade we have been working on what is called dual eligible population. just this last week we were able to reach an agreement with the administration. we will deliver higher quality care to that segment of our population. we will reduce costs and we will share the savings. that is what you get when you work with the governors. the administration did exactly that. that is what we are asking congress and the administration to continue to do. do what we did on dual

eligibles. work with us. we will help you. but you make decisions without consulting us, without understanding the consequences back home, then that leads to disaster. consequences you may not be aware of. we stood united, dave and i signed the letter together saying be aware of what you are doing, we want to work with you. that is what we do when we work together. >> let me just take it this way. i think to assume, for example, that we don't have differences of opinion would be 90 -- would be naive. we believe that voices need to be heard. we ought to be partners with washington, d.c., and they ought not to be subservient. we ought to be more coequal.

i believe in federalism. that being said, i think sometimes the party labels get in the way of resolving issues. principles will unite us. the principles of fiscal restraint and fiscal responsibility or something that democrats and republicans agree on. where we disagree sometimes is the process of how to get from here to there. those are things we will debate and have discussions on. governors do have to go back and balance their budgets. they do have to execute. a little different than sitting on the sidelines, where we see a lot of quantification and not enough action. again, i think the principles of fiscal restraint and responsibility when things we understand as governors and we wish they understood that better in washington d.c., so we did not get into the problems we see today. the combined budgets of all the 50 states of the united states of america is about $1.60

trillion. the deficit being spent annually right now in washington d.c. is about $1.40 trillion. we are spending a lot more money in washington d.c. than we are in the combined efforts of the states. we have this thing a little bit upside-down. we have to get back to fiscal prudence and responsibility. we are more than happy as governor to help lead in fiscal restraint and responsibility and partner with washington so they can get their fiscal house in order. >> the question is the cap and balance pledges not an impediment. >> let me try to answer the first question. first of all, you asked about pledges. i do not sign pledges. to me, for elected officials is about performance, not pledges. secondly, you asked about what is going on in washington d.c.

let me give you the perspective from middle america out in nebraska. most americans have strong opinions about this and a variety of other issues. at the end of the day, we sit down in our family budgets, business budget, and we resolve these issues. that is what the governors do every single day. we may do it a little bit differently. drop some this partisanship and let's do what is right for america. we need a president to lead and the president and congress to sit down and work together and resolve this issue. america cannot default on its obligations. >> i do not believe it is an impediment. is a catalyst that will get people to talk about things and i think they will resolve it. i signed it because i think it is a good approach to resolve the fiscal irresponsibility in washington d.c., no more and no less. it is not the only way, but it

is a way to start and we need to make some decisions and do something about it now. >> [unintelligible] >> let me share with you a perspective from the state. for every dollar of not discretionary spending that is cut in washington d.c., one- third bit will come at the doorstep of the states. so everything they are talking about is real to us. what we did in our letter was say, let us be part of the discussion so you know the consequences. if not done right, and i am not exaggerating here, because of how fragile recovery is in some of our states, it can trigger them to slide back again. that is the last thing congress would want to see happen. that is why we want to engage and be part of this. we are very concerned about the cut. there is not a governor that

does not understand that cuts have to be made. we have to get our fiscal house in order. almost every governor with maybe the exclusion of two, have been through the tough decisions of making the cuts. we understand what it takes. we have done it. we do it every time. we have to balance our budgets. we don't have a choice, and we have to get it done on time. we are willing to work and help, but we cannot be later this issue. it is hurting the economic recovery of the state. people need to get to work. many businesses to spend the money to hire people back. people need to spend money to get sales tax revenues into the state to pay for services. because of what is going on in this discussion, it is holding us. we, the governors of this country, are saying get on with it and get it done. we did it, and you can.

>> i want to share a couple of things. each governor does a little bit differently in how they do their budget. in nebraska, a balanced budget without raising taxes. i eliminated state aid to local government so i could put it in state aid to education, because that is a higher priority. for me, the highest priority is education and jobs. the people of nebraska are prepared to take our cuts if they are fair and balanced. i have farmers and ranchers who are willing to stand up and say you can cut agriculture subsidies he do it fairly. as governors we are willing to make tough decisions. if we balance our -- we balance our budgets all the time. i would be happy if the federal government passed a budget by october 1 and we knew what to expect. i don't think that is an unreasonable expectation for the president and congress to get done. >> [unintelligible]

>> i am going to continue to make education and jobs my priorities, no matter what. if it is a 10% cut, that will dramatically impact the state's added tremendous an extraordinary cost. on the other hand, 1% or 2%? i will live with that and go and make the tough decisions. we are just asking, make a decision back there. the people in this state and country will respect you if you do it. >> for the last decade or the last three decades, the federal government has backed up the state in economic downturns with economic a while you guys have had to bagehot -- balance your budget. are you prepared, and is it wise to accept a balanced budget amendment in washington that would fundamentally in that

cycle? >> i have been fairly straightforward that the administrations of both parties have spent too much money in the federal government, whether you are republican or democrat. i support a balanced budget amendment. i think it helps us at the state level. at the federal level, you have to be concerned. you need some contingencies for when we are at war to take care of those circumstances, but if the federal government had to balance their budget, they might find the decisions are a little bit easier, because we have to tell our citizens of the time, we have a requirement to balance the budget, therefore we cannot give you all the money you would like. in my state have made it very clear, education and jobs if you want to move that date forward. >> unfunded pension obligations. are there any best practices for doing overhauls and reforms right?

>> i think washington state probably has if not the soundest, one of the soundest pension funds in the country. we stepped up back in the 1970's and saw what was ultimately going to happen. we stopped our early pension fund and started a new one that is much more shared responsibility, and that has allowed us to move forward. however, this legislative session, i have proposed that we cut all colas to that segment of that pension that was stopped back in the 1970's. it was not a popular idea. you can appreciate and understand that. i got it done bipartisan. it was the right thing to do. i have reduced our unfunded liability by 60%. we now are on a trajectory that will show us very stable, well

out into the future. there are other governors that have stepped up to pension reform as well. we are stepping up to it. there are some legal impediments. not every governor can go in there and fundamentally make changes. there are legal impediments along the way to pension reform, but in my state, we have done it. if not the most sound, we are one of the most sound pension funds in america today. >> [unintelligible] is the same thing being done everywhere? >> since i am not running for office again, i can tell you my opinion on this subject. [laughter] the media covers those things that do not work. those things where tens of thousands of people show up to protest. has the media covered those states that have stepped up to the problem and successfully got

it done in a bipartisan way? not in my opinion. i do not ever read about the state of washington. the state of washington that reform unemployment insurance, reform workers' compensation, the first time in 100 years. shared sacrifice by state employees, 3% across-the-board pay cuts. 25% increase in what they have to pay for health care. increased contribution to their pension fund. i don't read about that. why don't i read about that? because it is not controversial. we sat at the table and got the job done. in my opinion that is a reflection of what is going on in most of the states across america. the media has a tendency to put their attention only on those were there is protest or controversy or something to cover. i would invite you to cover the success of the governors of this nation. that step to the challenge and got the job done and in many

instances, done it bipartisan. they are leading the nation out of the recession. if you were not running, would you agree with me, guys? [laughter] >> what will the first tri-u.s. governors forum contribute? >> it was a very historic event for the national governors' association. it began in our february meeting, where we signed an agreement to work at a sub national level, governor to governor, american governor to chinese governor, and collectively, our national governors association was the friendship league in china. yesterday was an example of what we can accomplish. we had a signing ceremony of 20 different companies signed up in a partnership to do more trade. today we will have a forum of american governors and chinese governors in which we will talk about trade missions and success. it is based on a foundation of

mutual respect and benefit. in my state, we are the most trade dependent state in the nation. for the first time in history of my state, my number one trading partner is not china. we know there are missed opportunities if we can enhance trade, but we know that trade does not come about without friendship, respect, exchange of culture, exchange of education, knowing people, getting to understand and mutual respect. from there we want to grow to mutual benefit and trade and economic development. today will be a historic event for china and for the united states. the state department is here. we will have a greeting from president obama and from president hu jintao. in turn, the american governors will visit china in the fall to continue this dialogue in the forum that we start today. it is a great opportunity, and then the baton will be passed

individual group -- in a vigil governors in china and america to carry on the tradition we started here in february and july in america. thank you all very much. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> this weekend on c-span, live from salt lake city, the nation's governors look at the lessons of 9/11 and features speaker, thomas friedman, talks competitiveness and the economy. look for live coverage saturday at 5:30 p.m. eastern and sunday

at 1:30 p.m. eastern. >> next, ari and i have been 10 and tim armstrong talk about the merger of aol and the huffington post. after that, the deficit and debt reduction talks. >> this is the members room here at the library of congress, a private room for senators and house speakers. they can also have their personal records held here at the library. how many congressional collections are there? it will find out in c-span original documentary, the library of congress. we will tour the iconic jefferson building, including the great hall and the reading room. we'll show treasurys found in the rare books, including the original thomas jefferson library, and presidential papers from george washington to calvin coolidge.

learn how the library is using technology to discover hidden secrets in their collection and to preserve its holdings for future generations. join us for the library of congress, this monday night at 8 eastern and pacific on c-span. the library holds the personal records of over 900 current and former members of congress. >> next, tim armstrong and ariana covington talk about the merger of their companies and how the internet has impacted journalism. walter isaacson also takes part. the national press club hosted this hour-long event. >> good afternoon and welcome to the national press club. i am the 100 for president of

the national press club. we are the world's leading professional organization for journalists, committed to our profession's future. we are working to foster a free press worldwide. for more information about the national press club, please visit our website. to donate to programs offered to the public for our national journalism library, please visit www.press.org/library. our head table includes guest of our speakers as well as working journalists to our club members. it is not necessarily a lack of journalistic objectivity you are seeing. i would like to welcome our c- span and public radio audiences today. our lunches are featured at our weekly podcast, available for

free download on itunes. you can also follow the action on twitter. after our guests speeches conclude, we'll have questions and answers. now it is time to introduce our table guests and i would like to ask each of you here to stand up briefly as your name is announced from your right. we begin with brian doyle, a with a producer at politico. vanessa box is ceo of 9 by blue. a reporter with dow jones newswire, a guest of our speaker, who also has remarks today, is walter isaacson, ceo of the aspen institute. senior business editor at npr, and we will skip over our speaker for just a moment, melissa is our fantastic speakers' committee chair and

for that we will be eternally grateful. get over our second speaker for a moment, and we have a senior press secretary with the natural resources defense council and the organizer of today's event. we are told there is a vote and we are awaiting another guest of the speaker, congressman brad miller of north carolina. that will add to the drama today, whether he actually makes it to the head table. andrea stone of huffington post , the washington director of reporters without borders and a vital member of our press freedom committee, an editor at large who has been blogging for huffington post since day one. now, please, a larger round of applause for everyone. if there were a king and queen of on-line journalism, our headline duo of guest speakers could be considered candidates

or members of the royal family. it is not just another reshaping of aol, but a redefinition of the on-line news business. less than six months later, a oh, well now boasts a news staff reportedly as large as that of the new york times. as if to add insult to the times'injury, huffington post surpassed the times as the most visited site on the internet. last week, huffpo opened a u.k. edition and becoming the newest edition to london's interesting journalism theme, just as one of its oldest ventures was printing its final edition. given of issues there, one can imagine there is an opportunity for a new player on the team.

patch division is an experiment and hyper local journalism today. the plant aol government news side is attempting to shake and redefine and restructure. it has come with some anxiety. along with hiring some of the biggest names in journalism, aol has had to let go of more than 700 workers since its purchase, and squelch the careers of some budding writers and editors. while it reportedly pays his salary to some of its top journalist, it play -- also pays bloggers for being on line. huffington post's tendency to dramatic presentation has drawn some scorn from some traditional journalists. let's get to our speakers now. as chairman and ceo of aol, tim

armstrong may be a new media mogul, but he got his start in an old school style, running a newspaper. he and his friends started the tabloid in boston in the early 1990's, and get new graduates entering the workplace. years later he was tapped to take over and run another paper called a square deal. he realized the pitcher during a visit to a computer lab at mit where researchers were working on the mosaic web browser. he had a realization and immediately began working on ways to build a major on-line news operation and sell advertising on line, and he is not doing that. he served as president of america's operations for google and also worked for the abc- espn internet doar to. iana is best known -- ariana

straddles the world of politics, media, and hollywood like few others. those who might try to define her -- she once teamed up with the green party candidate in an attempt to beat another out of the barks candidate, or schwarzenegger. she is the author of 13 books including some self-help books based on her personal experience, and political commentaries. the most recent was published last year. her first book was published in -- by random house back in 1974, not long after she graduated from cambridge with a master's in economics. she served as president of the university's famed debating society. perhaps what is most intriguing is that her life so far is that

there may be more surprises in store down the line. finally, we have a special guest to help put all this in perspective, walter isaacson. managing editor of time magazine, he cut his journalistic the at the sunday times in london and the times picayune in new orleans. it currently serves as chairman of the broadcasting board of governors which runs the voice of america and other broadcasting operations for the federal government. he is president and ceo of the aspen institute. and i thought i had trouble balancing to jobs. we are looking forward to hearing from all these individuals before we get to questions and answers at the bottom of the hour. tim, you will lead us off. [applause] >> first and foremost, this is a very special institution and we are honored to be here today.

i just want to say one thing quickly quicklyariana. cheek -- one thing quickly about ariana. she came from calgary, canada, down here for this. i hope this will be a memorable day for both of us. everything was perfectly set up when i got here, so that was nice. ted has been one of my mentors and he was one of the key people that let aol to its global success. i was grateful to see him here today. before i turn it over a twoariana, i wanted to go over a couple of big things we are

betting on as a company and talk about the things we see in the beecher and why we are putting such a big investment in journalism. the number one question i get on wall street all the time is what journalism? the rest of the world seems to be going away from journalism. why did you by the huffington post? why are you hiring people in the journalism field? the things i am about to talk about are the core essence of what we believe in. the first is really a bet on a human need. he woke up in today was your birthday on planet earth, what would you notice and what would you see? one is there are four or 5 billion phones in people's pockets and a lot of smart phone growth across the world, which means people are going to be connected full time to information all the time. even six or seven or eight years ago that was a big difference.

information is probably one of the most powerful things that allows people to live their lives properly and drives the economy. consumers are going to want more and better information and they are going to want it from people who know about the information that they need. i will talk more about that in one minute. the second piece is that the human need stake is really about connecting off line as the new online. technology has put a big change across many of our industries and many of the things we do. at the ended the day, we are really pointed at what is going to make physical changes in people's lives and make their lives better and hopefully more open. i was at a panel last week for somebody said something that i probably will not forget for the rest of my life. they said social media is really important, and things that are happening today are really happened, but the things that

are happening in the middle east and things that are happening in this country right now, without bible information and clear information about what is happening, -- valuable information, the physical state of help people live their lives off line is the most important state of human beings and information that people share the most to try to improve their lives. the second main area is we are betting big on local. that is because that is where people live their lives. brian barden is here, the editor on package. 86% of commerce affects 100% of people's lives locally, and their families are local and there has been a giants white

space created by the changes that have happened in the media landscape. local is important for patch and for huffingtonthe third thing wd thing is brands matter. a lot. one of the things that got me to leave google, i did not think everything was going to be user generated and the brands were not going to matter in the intermission space. i saw people retreating around some of the major brands and decreasing investments. brands are going to be more important in the future. it is the way that people navigate their lives. the research points to the fact that the majority of users on the internet today use less than 30 sites.

15% of people use 10-14 sites. if you think of that, the internet is exploding, people are using brands to navigate how they get information. i think it is just the opposite. consumers are going to demand the highest quality brands and information and journalism space. the companies that do that will be the most successful. i think that is where things are going. i just wanted to close with a few important points about the future of journalism. and journalists need technology. i think there is a big fear from the journalism community around

technology. we have of bunch of investments we have made as a company in technology and if you look at where the journalists said reverses all the other people in the media food chain, everyone else has desktops and technologies. we were talking about this earlier. journalists need to understand technology and how technology can help them do a better job. i think that is one of the things that we are working on. the second bullet point is transparency. one of the experiments we did was having all the journalists put the transparency of what they believed, they voted for. i think in the journalism space, there is a lot of stories.

people are not transparent about what they believe then. that is something that we would like to see in the future. they may be controversial, but that is something that we have talked to consumers about. the biggest model going forward, and the business models and the content space in the long haul are probably going to look like the current business models where free is going to be very big. as an industry, that debate is important, but what is more important than the business model is what we deliver. i think there is ammoniacal focus on the product of journalism that is important. what is journalism to 4 billion people with smart phones? when we get up and the morning,

do we think about creating journalism for that space? i think that is a really important piece. i would finally end by -- journalists had asked us why we are investing in journalism. i always say that the journalist is not a single entity. the journalist is a network. my guess is that there is a power that certain people in the world are able to convene the most important of information as a society have they're able to synthesize it can get it out to people in a way that is very manageable and focused. they cannot lose confidence in the value that they bring to the world. the most important thing we have in this country is that when

journalists the focus on that, and that is police secret of what we are investing in. it comes down to great content from great people. it is a pleasure to be here and i'll be looking for a bit during the comments and questions as we move forward. >> it is actually a great to be here. i can think of a better place to be on my birthday. i am delighted to be sharing this with walter who i work with every day. i have known him ever since the 70's. he was worried -- and working for rupert murdoch and i was in london and dreaming of one day

becoming a blogger in america. [applause] read his newto book on steve jobs. it is safe to say that right now, he is probably the only man in washington that is making jobs a priority. [applause] and i also loved his autobiography on henry kissinger. he was the first person to reassure me that having an accent was not a problem. he said, you can never underestimate the complete advantages of the other end comprehends ability. -- utter incomprehensibility. [laughter] media is an incredible time of

-- i was in london launching the huffington post when the phone hacking scandal started. it was amazing to see first of all, how old fashioned and incredibly relevant the debate, 168 years on paper. but the incredible institution of the british press acting in ways that would have been utterly disgusting coming from anywhere in the media universe. and it was new media that played a huge part in bringing the news of the world down so fast. it was amazing what was happening on twitter. the hashtag notw, moments

getting thousands of tweets. i stopped counting at 39 because i knew it was probably going to be enough. the story was broken by another major institution, the guardian. it was broken at the time when the guardian had announced -- a completely embraced new media. they broke the story by doing what new media does best. obsessively staying on a story. this story is years old. most publications had moved on. but the unique ability of new media is to stay on the story

and got it until you have an impact or until you break through. that is what the guardian said. demonstrating the vulnerability, the future belongs to those that bring together the best of all the media. fact checking, transparency. and the best of new media, interactivity, engagement, and real time provision of information. it was demonstrated over the last week with the story still unfolding. one more thing demonstrated is that social media is about accountability. the reason, arguably, that he withdrew his bid for the british sky broadcasting is because the entire parliament and all three leaders of major parties have urged him to do so. they did not ask him because they suddenly had an epiphany. they urged him to do so because

of the pressure they were getting from social media and their constituencies. everything is accelerating and the brave new world of media. this is really why i am so excited about the fact that social media, her new media is all about engagement. i was in love with him even before i became part of the media group. it is really about 150 towns across america. we lost 33 in primary states to be able to cover the 2012 alexian's. and we lost last we, within 48 hours, 600 people signed up to the citizen journalists, bringing the news to all of you.

bringing the local voices into the national dialogue. it is one of the things i was so excited about. the 1300 professional journalists, being a platform that provided him distribution channels to thousands of people. to write about anything that they care about. that is the future that we are betting on. professional and journalists, there could be thousands of them for the best understanding of how to break a story and stay on a story. and a platform with tens of thousands of people commenting. it is clear then that with that universe, i have understanding because they don't quite see what has happened.

self expression has become the new entertainment and a major source of fulfillment. in the past, why are people watching television, often a bad television? that anybody asked the question? sheehan people are constantly asking her question of why people are updating wikipedia entries. people do this without being paid. it is how much people want to be part of the story of their times. they want to bear witness. that brings me to my last while. i read of but about a man who ended up becoming prime minister of england.

that was a novel he wrote because he believed that before he ran for prime minister, he needed to capture the imagination of the people in his country to help him understand the social injustice is going on. it was part of the whole editorial position of the huffington post. you don't have to be on the left to care about social injustice. or to care about what is happening to the middle class. in 1845, he used a novel to touch people of the hearts and minds to bear witness of what was happening in his time. today, who media harming tens of thousands of people around the world have their witness to what is happening in their countries and in their time. and ultimately, bearing witness is the highest responsibility we have for journalists.

it is a responsibility we have as citizens. we don't have a better tool or greater opportunities to bear witness at the time of crisis when millions of people are living lives of extreme deprivation. we should be grateful that we're living during this extraordinary time of transition when all of us have the opportunity to bear witness. a thank-you. >> >> thank you. -- thank you. [applause] >> i was wondering why i was chosen to put in perspective, and the realize i have written about ben franklin, albert einstein, who and steve jobs. that is the perspective we should view ariana in. one of the things about high media and the low media, will

the media is not really that old. it is only 60 or 70 years old. there was a social vibrant media in which there was some mainstream publications. when ben franklin arrived, there were a 11 newspapers, one for each faction. he started the twelfth representing the market street middle-class. and he also relied on contributions, social media. people were basically writing because they wanted to bear witness to the struggle that was happening in the 1700's in america. they also occasionally wrote anonymously. ben franklin used a pseudonym. as they were doing it, they had a hybrid of the values of

journalism that were emerging as well as the value of social media, contributing and being part. they would slip sometimes there. contributions under the door, but others were reporters that had a big names. they also -- and this is what he is trying to do at aol, a hybrid business model. he always made sure he charged a bid for the newspaper and had a great advertisers. if he was totally beholden on advertisers, freedom of expression would be cramped. it would hurt to be an advertising only model. this started having a variety of revenue streams. we have our way back to that position now. i was present at the creation of many aol milestones land, in the

early 1990's. hail well was coming out -- aol was coming up. those that remember prodiby, delphi, compuserve, many others. i made a deal because i was the deputy editor that i would try this out. we put time magazine online. they only had 200,000 users, but i still cannot get my name. i said, the final deal want is that i want my name. some poor guy got kicked off or have his e-mail account now directly said to robert murdoch or whatever. part of that arrangement that we made was afraid for time

magazine because for 60 years, there had been this monopoly type of mainstream media where information was handed down because of the rise of the broadcast media. any 17-year-old could start a press, but it was hard to start a tv network or a radio network. in the metropolitan newspapers were consolidated into their would generally be one or two newspapers. people in the media handed down the words. the most interesting thing that happened was in the early 1990's, the feedback. the discussion. the correcting of fact, the people that added information and the wonderful bulletin board service that we called it back then. the other thing back then was the deal we made.

when you went on the early 1990's. you pay a certain amount per hour. you were charged by the hour and aol was in competition with other supervisors. they wanted our content, and they would pay us for the about people were on line. we got a percentage of that revenue. it was a small thing, but a dual revenue model that worked. it was undermined when everybody could put their content on the web and people started creating things in the service providers realized that if didn't make any difference to them whether they paid in the content creators at all because they would get more money if the content with out there for free and you were paying the phone company or the cable company.

we started pathfinder, which moved away from, you serve -- compuserve and others. people with -- people who from madison avenue came up with large baskets of money. that business model is not totally sustainable in the long run. we need the hybrid business model that you have heard a little bit about today. if you want a special type of information, it would be good to have consumer revenues as that of its being advertising only. in new orleans, when we were rebuilding, we tried to get people involved in social media. people in the wealthier neighborhoods wanted a certain set of eyeballs, but in the foreign neighborhoods, it was harder to get people to write about what challenges needed

rebuilding. they kept saying, you want us to do this for free? and that tension that some people love to do this because they are part of the conversation, i believe that we have to develop some sort of hybrid model. the broadcasting board of governors, we looked back over 60 years in which authoritarian regimes control of their people by controlling the free flow of information. a voice of america was made to break through the censorship. we had a meeting of all of our entities and we have a strategic plan in which we are shifting large amounts of resources into social media and breaking down the fire walls. so that many people are around the world can have the same

freedoms we have in this country. and accelerate the free flow of ideas. and if you luck, this is truly a noble cause. the move towards him digital media and more people having access and the less control and your gatekeepers is a great thing. if you love at a long arc of history from a very on the -- ariana huffington, it always tended to been to the ark of history toward democracy and towards freedom. you are seeing that with what is coming out of the square. you're seeing it throughout the middle east. you are seeing in iran, it is the fifth largest per-capita

user of the internet. people cannot control the free flow of information will not be able to control their people. i covered the fall of the berlin wall. i was at the hotel and one of the people working there said, can you open up your room in the afternoon because it is the only place they can see outside satellite tv. i said, sure. i met some of the students. they were not watching the music videos, they were watching what was happening in the shipyard. about 10 years ago, it was on a news will we did where they started talking about merging. i was watching in the internet cafes into the tiny parts of china how people were using the internet. i would go up to them and it

would be blocked. one of them said -- we know how to go through proxy servers the censors are clueless about. people get to be part of the discourse and i want to congratulate her. [applause] >> i would invite them to come back to the podium. i have the ability to dance up and down the stage here. continuing that analogy with benjamin franklin. he did not exactly set the bar to hide. he to make a scientific discovery on par with electricity and sustained and democracy for over 200 years. we have questions from the

audience and over the internet. many of these are appropriate to both of you. relating to the murdoch scandal, i think this question stand alone without that, how does the huffington post in the entire media landscape and draw the line between the interest of the public and the public interest? >> i suppose what the question means here is the fact that the public is interested in highbrow and lowbrow things. we are finding the public wants to click on stories about lindsay lohan and charlie sheen. they are not in the public interest, but they are in the interest of the public. we have seen that it is human nature and we discovered when we made a deal with facebook, it

would be possible for our leaders to see what their friends were leading -- reading and commenting on. they did not want their friends to know that they were looking at those things. we had to add a button where people could look on the stories and their friends are assuming they're only looking at stories that are highbrow. [laughter] >> horrified that answer a little bit. how much of that stuff is right, and where you cut the line off at the bottom? what is the mix that is ideal? >> at the moment, if you go on any of our sections, then as the media universe of 50 different sites that cover everything from

politics to books, style, entertainment. we launched three new sections have for celebrity and half for san francisco. we are doing regional sites. we have 24 patches, so stories can surface from the hyper local level, the regional level, and the national level. by covering the entire waterfront, and those of you the come, who you basically let the world know what you consider important. and under that, you have the public interest stories and on the right-hand side, the lowbrows stories. if it is an entire highbrow public, you can ignore it.

>> we have a pretty strict editorial standards in terms of nudity, for example. >> is that a good thing nor a bad thing? >> not entirely good thing for an on-line publication. it was famously said, it is in the eye of the beholder. we regularly review our standards. >> with the recent acquisitions, how you balance the editorial brands simultaneously? is it unreasonable to think that one of them essentially gets phased out? >> we spend a lot of time on the brands. about 300 consumer phasing brands. recently we announced that will be continuing to go down to more powerful brands. what we basically program inside for, what the audience is, the

attractions are very different. we are working on that. when of the things that is actually beneficial is that we are able to use the technology platforms and he's killed a journalist platforms to basically populate all of these different sites. when he landed his helicopter in new jersey at the baseball game, it was a really amazing example of how we can combine program -- we had a reporter at the field. and within a couple of minutes, it was on the huffington post. i ran into him last week and asked him about it. i said, we did hatch. i said, we did hatch. he said, i